^x  OF  rmcf> 


V.5 


EXPOSITORY    THOUGHTS 
ON  THE  GOSPELS. 


iPOPt  ii^.A.M:ir.Y  .A.Nr>  raiAr.A.TE  use. 


WITH     THE     TEXT     COMPLETE. 

BY  THE  REV.  J.  C.  RYLE,  B.A., 

CHRIST   CHUBCH,    OXFOED, 

VICAR  OP  STRADBROKE,   SUFFOLK. 


ST.  JOHlSr.     VOL.   I. 


ISTEW    YOEK: 
ROBERT    CARTER    &    BROTHERS, 

530    BROADWAY. 
1879. 


PREFACE 


I  SEND  forth  the  volume  now  in  the  reader's  hands,  wifh 
much  diffidence,  and  a  very  deep  sense  of  responsibility. 
It  is  no  light  matter  to  publish  an  exposition  of  any 
book  in  the  Bible.  It  is  a  peculiarly  serious  undertak- 
ing to  attempt  a  Commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  St.  John. 

I  do  not  forget  that  we  are  all  apt  to  exaggerate  the 
difficulties  of  our  own  particular  department  of  literary 
labour.  But  I  think  every  intelligent  student  of  Scrip- 
ture will  bear  me  out  when  I  say,  that  St.  John's  Gospel 
is  pre-eminently  full  of  things  "  hard  to  be  understood." 
(2  Pet.  iii.  16.)  It  contains  a  large  portion  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ's  doctrinal  teaching.  It  abounds  in  "  deep 
things  of  God,"  and  "  sayings  of  the  King,"  which  we 
feel  instinctively  we  have  no  line  to  fully  fathom,  no 
mind  to  fully  comprehend,  no  words  to  fully  explain. 
It  must  needs  be  that  such  a  book  of  Scripture  should 
be  difficult.  I  can  truly  say  that  I  have  commented  on 
many  a  verse  in  this  Gospel  with  fear  and  trembling.  I 
have  often  said  to  myself,  "  Who  is  sufficient  for  these 
things  ?" — "  The  place  whereon  thou  standest  is  holy 
ground."  (2  Cor.  ii.  16  ;  Exod.  iii.  5.) 

The  nature  of  the  work  now  published,  requires  a  few 
words  of  explanation.  It  is  a  continuation  of  the  "  Expo- 
sitory Thoughts  on  the  Gospels,"  of  which  four  volumes, 
comprising  the  first  three  Gospels,  have  been  already 
Bent  forth.    Like  the  volumes  on  St.  Matthew,  St.  Mark 


IV  PKEFACE. 

and  St.  Luke,  the  basis  of  the  work  is  a  continuous  series 
of  short  expositions,  intended  for  family  or  private  read 
ing,  or  for  the  use  of  those  who  visit  the  sick  and  the 
poor.  But,  unlike  the  previous  volumes,  the  work  now 
in  the  reader's  hands  contains  full  explanatory  notes  on 
every  verse  of  the  portions  expounded,  forming,  in  fact, 
a  complete  Commentary. 

This  "Commentary"  is  so  extensive  that  it  occupies 
far  more  space  than  tll§  "  Expository  Thoughts,"  and  is, 
I  must  honestl}^  confess,  the  principal  part  of  the  work. 
To  some  it  may  appear  far  too  long  and  full.  But  the 
circumstances  of  the  times  are  my  justification.*  We 
live  in  a  day  of  abounding  vagueness  and  indistinctness 
on  doctrinal  subjects  in  religion.  ISTow,  if  ever,  it  is  the 
duty  of  all  advocates  of  clear,  well-defined,  sharply-cut 
theolog}^,  to  supply  proof  that  their  views  are  thoroughly 
borne  out  by  Scripture.  I  have  endeavoured  to  do  so  in 
this  Commentar}^  I  hold  that  the  Gospel  of  St.  John, 
rightly  interpreted,  is  the  best  and  simplest  answer  to 
those  who  profess  to  admire  a  vague  and  indistinct  Chris- 
tianity. 

*  The  expectations  of  Bengel,  the  German  commentator,  appear  likely 
to  be  fulfilled  with  curious  accuracy  in  the  present  day.  He  said,  in  the 
year  A.  D.  1740, — "Though  Socinianism  and  Popery  at  present  appear 
mutually  aloof,  they  will  in  process  of  time  form  a  mighty  confluence, 
that  will  burst  all  bounds,  and  bring  everything  to  a  crisis.  "We 
may  expect  it  in  the  following  way.  The  residue  of  heavenly  influence 
on  the  professing  Church,  as  a  body,  wUl  have  utterly  evaporated,  its 
holy  things  having  been  already  more  and  more  prostituted  to  the  spirit 
of  this  world.  The  IToly  Spirit  being  thus  withdrawn  from  the  camp  at 
large,  the  world  A\'ill  deem  its  own  victory  and  triumph  secured.  Now, 
therefore,  a  spirit  of  liberal  Latitudinarianism  will  prevail  everywhere, — 
a  notion  that  every  one  may  be  right  in  his  own  way  of  thinking,  and 
consequently  that  all  is  well  with  the  Jew,  the  Turk,  and  the  Pagan. 
Ideas  of  this  kind  will  wonderfully  prepare  men  for  embracing  the  false 
prophet."  {Life  of  Bengel,  Walker's  edition,  page  322.)  How  painfully 
correct  these  prog:nostications,  made  125  jears  ago,  have  proved,  any 
one  who  observes  the  state  of  rehgious  feeling  in  England  must  know 
only  too  well  1 


PREFACE.  Y 

Tlie  theological  stand-point  which  the  writer  of  this 
Commentary  occupies  will  be  obvious  to  any  intelligent 
reader.  Such  an  one  will  see  at  a  glance  that  I  belong 
to  that  school  in  the  Church  of  England  which,  rightly 
or  wrongly,  is  called  "  Evangelical."  He  will  see  that 
I  have  no  sympathy  whatever  with  either  Komish  or 
Neologian  tendencies.  He  will  see  that  I  bold  firmly 
the  distinctive  theological  views  of  the  Eeformers  and 
doctrinal  Puritans,  and  that  ^^tally  disapprove  the 
loose  and  broad  theology  of  some  modern  schools  of 
divines. — But  while  I  say  all  this,  I  must  be  allowed  to 
add,  that  in  interpreting  Scripture,  I  "  call  no  man  mas- 
ter or  father."  I  abhor  the  idea  of  wresting  and  w^arp- 
ing  God's  Word  in  order  to  made  it  support  party  views. 
Throughout  this  Commentary  I  have  endeavoured  ho- 
nestlj^  and  conscientiously  to  find  out  the  real  meaning 
of  every  sentence  on  which  I  have  commented.  I  have 
evaded  no  difiiculty,  and  shrunk  from  no  inference.  I 
have  simply  followed  Scripture  wherever  its  words  seem- 
ed to  point,  and  accepted  whatever  they  seemed  to  mean. 
I  have  never  hesitated  to  express  my  disagreement  from 
the  views  of  other  commentators  if  occasion  required ; 
but  when  I  have  done  so  I  have  tried  to  do  it  with 
courtesy  and  respect. 

On  one  point  of  vast  importance  in  the  present  day, 
the  reader  will  see  that  I  hold  very  decided  opinions. 
That  point  is  inspiration.  I  feel  no  hesitation  in  avow- 
ing, that  I  believe  in  the  "plenary  inspiration  "  of  every 
word  of  the  original  text  of  Holy  Scripture.  I  hold  not 
only  that  the  Bible  contains  the  Word  of  God,  but  that 
every  jot  of  it  was  written,  or  brought  together,  by 
Divine  inspiration,  and  is  the  Word  of  God.  I  entirely 
disagree  with  those  who  maintain  that  the  writers  of  the 


VI  PREFACE. 

Bible  were  partially  inspired,  or  inspired  to  such  a 
limited  extent  that  discrepancies,  inaccuracies,  and  con- 
tradictions to  the  facts  of  science  and  history,  must  be 
expected  and  do  exist  in  their  writings.  I  utterly  repu- 
diate such  a  theory.  I  consider  that  it  practically 
destroys  the  whole  value  of  God's  Word,  puts  a  sword 
in  the  hand  of  infidels  and  sceptics,  and  raises  far  more 
serious  difficulties  than  it  pretends  to  solve. 

I  grant  freely  that^Pe  theory  of  "  plenary  verbal 
inspiration,"  involves  some  difficulties.  I  do  not  pretend 
to  answer  all  the  objections  brought  against  it,  or  to 
defend  all  that  has  been  written  by  its  supporters.*  I 
am  content  to  remember  that  all  inspiration  is  a  miracu- 
lous operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and,  like  every  opera- 
tion of  the  Holy  Ghost,  must  needs  be  mysterious.  It 
is  an  operation  of  which  not  forty  men  in  the  world 
have  been  made  the  subjects,  and  the  manner  of  which 
not  one  of  the  forty  has  described.  It  stands  to  reason 
that  the  whole  question  of  inspiration,  like  everytliing 
else  supernatural,  m.ust  necessarily  contain  much  that  is 
mysterious,  and  much  that  we  cannot  explain. — But  the 
difficulties  of  the  "  plenary  vebal "  theory  appear  to  me 
mere  trifles,  compared  with  those  which  surround  the 
counter  theory  of  "partial  inspiration."  Once  admit 
the  principle  that  the  writers  of  the  Bible  could  mal^e 

*  When  I  speak  of  "plenary  verbal  inspiration,"  I  do  not  for  a 
moment  admit  the  absurd,  theory  that  all  parts  of  the  Bible  are  equally 
important.  I  should  never  dream  of  saying  that  the  catalogues  in  Chro- 
nicles are  of  as  much  value  to  the  Church  as  the  Gospel  of  St.  John. 
But  I  do  maintain  that  all  parts  of  the  Bible  are  equally  "  given  by 
inspiration  of  God,"  and  that  all  are  to  be  regarded  as  "  God's  Word." 
If  we  do  not  see  the  Divine  character  of  any  particular  part,  it  is  because 
we  have  at  present  no  eyes  to  see  it.  The  humblest  moss  is  as  much 
Ihe  handiwork  of  God's  creative  power  as  the  cedar  of  Lebanon.  Yet 
it  would  bo  foolish  to  say  it  was  an  equally  important  part  of  creation. 
The  least  verse  in  the  Bible  is  just  as  truly  "  given  by  inspiration  "  9« 
the  greatest.     But  it  does  not  follow  that  it  is  equally  valuable. 


PREFACE.  Vil 

mistakes,  and  were  not  in  all  things  guided  by  the  Spirit, 
and  I  know  not  where  I  am.  I  see  nothing  certain 
nothing  solid,  nothing  trustworthy  in  the  foundations 
of  my  faith.  A  fog  has  descended  on  the  Book  of  God, 
and  enveloped  every  chapter  in  uncertainty !  Who 
shall  decide  when  the  writers  of  Scripture  made  mis- 
takes, and  when  they  did  not?  How  am  I  to  know 
where  inspiration  ends,  and  where  it  begins  ?  What  I 
think  inspired,  another  may^Bnk  uninspired !  The 
texts  that  I  rest  upon,  may  possibly  have  been  put  in 
by  a  slip  of  the  pen  !  The  words  and  phrases  that  I 
love  to  feed  upon,  may  possibly  be  weak  earthly  expres- 
sions, in  writing  which  the  author  was  left  to  his  own 
private  uninspired  mind  ! — The  glory  is  departed  from 
my  Bible  at  this  rate.  A  cold  feeling  of  suspicion  and 
doubt  creeps  over  me  as  I  read  it.  I  am  almost  tempted 
to  lay  it  down  in  flat  despair.  A  partially  inspired 
Bible  is  little  better  than  no  Bible  a,t  all.  Give  me  the 
*'  plenary  verbal "  theory,  with  all  its  difficulties,  rather 
than  this.  I  accept  the  difficulties  of  that  theory,  and 
humbly  wait  for  their  solution.  But  while  I  wait,  I 
feel  that  I  am  standing  on  a  rock. 

I  grant  the  existence  of  occasional  difficulties,  and 
apparent  discrepa,ncies,  in  Scripture.  They  are  trace- 
able, in  some  cases,  I  believe,  to  the  errors  of  early 
transcribers;  and  in  others  to, our  ignorance  of  explana- 
tory circumstances  and  minute  links  and  details.  To  tell 
us  that  things  cannot  be  explained,  merely  because  we  are 
not  at  present  able  to  explain  them,,  is  childish  and 
absurd!  "He  that  believeth  shall  not  make  haste." 
(Isa.  xxviii.  16.)  A  true  philosopher  will  never  give  up 
a  sound  theory,  on  account  of  a  few  difficulties.  He  will 
rather  say^-^"-  J  can  afford  to  wait.     It  wUl  all  he  plain 


Vlll  PREFACE. 

• 
one  day."     For  my  own  part,  I  believe  that  the  vvhole 

Bible,  as  it  came  originally  from  the  hands  of  the  inspired 
writers,  was  verbally  perfect  and  without  flaw.  I  believe 
that  the  inspired  writers  were  infallibly  guided  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  both  in  their  selection  of  matter  and  their 
choice  of  words.  I  believe  that  even  now,  when  we 
cannot  explain  alleged  difficulties  in  Holy  Scripture,  the 
wisest  course  is  to  blame  the  interpreter  and  not  the  text, 
to  suspect  our  own  ignc^fhce  to  be  in  fault,  and  not  any 
defect  in  God's  Word.  The  theological  system  of  modern 
days,  which  delights  in  magnifying  the  so-called  mistakes 
of  the  Bible,  in  explaining  away  its  miraculous  narratives, 
and  in  making  as  littie  as  possible  of  its  Divine  character 
and  supernatural  element,  is  a  system  that  I  cannot  away 
with.  It  seems  to  me  to  take  a  rock  from  beneath  our 
feet,  and  plant  us  on  a  quicksand.  It  robs  us  of  bread, 
and  does  not  give  us  in  its  place  so  much  as  a  stone. 

Nothing,  to  my  mind,  is  so  unutterably  painful  as  the 
patronizing  tone  of  compassion  which  the  modern  advo 
cates  of  "  partial  inspiration"  adopt  in  speaking  of  the 
writers  of  the  Bible.  They  write  and  talk  as  if  St.  Paul 
and  St.  John,  and  their  companions,  were  nothing  better 
than  well-meaning  pious  men,  who  on  some  points  were 
greatly  mistaken,  and  far  below  our  enlightened  age ! 
They  speak  with  pity  and  contempt  of  that  system  of 
divinity  which  satisfied  the  master-builders  and  giants  of 
the  Church  in  by -gone  days  !  They  tell  us  complacently 
that  a  new  theology  is  needed  for  our  age,  and  that  a 
"  freer  handling"  of  the  Bible,  with  pens  untrammelled 
by  the  fetters  which  cumbered  former  interpreters,  will 
produce,  and  is  producing,  wonderful  results!  I  tho- 
roughly distrust  these  new  theologians,  however  learned 
jind  plausible  they  may  be,  and  I  expect  the  Church  will 


PREFACE.  ix 

receive  no  light  from  them.  I  see  nothing  solid  in  their 
arguments,  and  am  utterly  unmoved  by  them.  I  believe 
that  the  want  of  our  age  is  not  more  "free"  handlino-  of 
the  Bible,  but  more  ''reverent"  handling,  more  humility, 
more  patient  study,  and  more  prayer.  I  repeat  my  own 
firm  conviction,  that  no  theory  of  inspiration  involves  so 
few  difficulties  as  that  of  "  plenary  verbal  inspiration." 
To  that  theory  I  entirely  adhere,  and  on  that  theory  my 
readers  will  find  this  Commentary  is  written. 

In  preparing  this  Commentary  I  have  made  it  a  point 
of  duty  to  look  through  every  work  on  St.  John's  Gos- 
pel which  I  could  meet  with.  I  append  a  list  of  books, 
partly  because  it  may  be  interesting  and  useful  to  some 
readers,  and  partly  because  I  wish  to  show  that  when  I 
differ  from  the  authors,  I  have  not  written  in  ignorance 
of  their  opinions. 

The  commentaries  and  expository  works  on  St.  John 
which  I  have  looked  through  are  the  following : — 

I.  Of  Fathers.  Origen,  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Chry- 
sostom,  Augustine,  Theophylact,  Euthymius,  and  the 
Catena  Aurea. 

II.  Of  Foreign  Reformers  and  their  successors^  to  the 
close  of  the  seventeenth  century.  Melancthon,  Zwingle, 
Calvin,  Ecolampadius,  Brentius,  Bucer,  Bullinger, 
Gualter,  Pellican,  Flacius  Illyricus,  Musculus,  Beza^ 
Aretius,  Chemnitius,^  Diodati,  Calovius,  De  Dieu,  Coc- 
ceius,  Gomarus,  Nifanius,  Heinsius,  Glassius,f  Critici 
Sacri. 

*  The  work  I  here  refer  to  is  the  Commentary  on  the  "  Harmony  of 
the  Gospels,"  begun  by  Chemnitius,  and  continued  by  Lyserus  and 
Gerhard. 

f  The  work  of  Glassius  to  which  I  here  refer,  is  his  "  Expositions  of 
the  Gospels  and  Epistles  appointed  for  Sundays."  It  is  a  collection  of 
Homilies. 


X  PREFACE. 

III.  Of  Rornan  Catholic  Writers.  Rupertus,  Ferus, 
Arias  Montanus,  Toletus,  Barradius,  Maldonatus,  Cor« 
nelius  a  Lapide,  Jansenius,  Quesnel. 

lY.  Of  Scotch  and  English  Writers.  Rollock,  Hut- 
cliesoD.  Poolers  Synopsis  and  Annotations,  Cartwright, 
Trapp,  Mayer,  Leigh,  Lightfoot,  Baxter,  Hammond, 
Hall,  Henry,  Burkitt,  Whitby,  Pearce,  Gill,  Scott, 
Bloomfield,  Doddridge,  A.  Clarke,  Barnes,  Burgon, 
Alford,  Webster,  Wordsworth,  J.  Brown,  D.  Brown, 
Ford.  To  this  list  I  may  also  add  Arrowsmith,  on 
John  i. ;  Dyke,  on  John  ii.  iii. ;  Hildersam,  on  John  iv. ; 
Trench,  on  Miracles ;  and  Schottgen's  Horse  Hebraicae. 

V.  Of  German  Writers^  from  the  beginning  of  th6 
eighteenth  century  to  the  present  day.  Lampe,  Bengel, 
Tittman,  Tholuck,  Olshausen,  Stier,  Besser. 

Of  course  no  man  can  spend  years,  as  I  have  now  done, 
in  looking  through  this  formidable  mass  of  books,  with 
out  forming  some  decided  opinions  about  the  comparative 
merits  of  their  respective  authors.  Some  of  these 
opinions  I  have  no  hesitation  in  putting  down,  as  they 
may  be  of  use  to  some  of  my  younger  brethren  in  the 
ministry. 

(A.)  The  Fathers  appear  to  me  greatly  overrated, 
as  commentators  and  expositors.  Cyril  and  Chrysos- 
tom  are  far  the  most  valuable  of  them,  in  my  judgment, 
on  St.  John. 

(B.)  The  Continental  Reformers  and  their  successors 
appear  to  me  greatly  underrated  and  neglected.  Bren- 
tins  and  Musculus,  for  instance,  abound  in  excellent 
thoughts  and  suggestions,  but  seem  quite  ignored  by 
most  modern  commentators. 


PREFACE.  Xi 

(C.)  The  Eoman  Catholic  writers  often  contain  much 
that  is  useful  and  little  that  is  objectionable.  Happy 
would  it  be  for  the  Church  of  England  if  all  her  Clergy 
knew  their  Bibles  as  well  as  such  men  as  Ferus  and 
ToletusI 

(D.)  The  few  German  writers  that  I  have  consulted 
appear  to  me  to  be  far  too  highly  esteemed,  with  the 
exception  of  Bengel  and  Lampe.  Stier  is  always  reve- 
rential, but  tremendously  diffuse.  As  to  Olshausen, 
Tholuck,  and  Tittman,  I  have  generally  laid  down  their 
works  with  unmixed  disappointment.  What  people 
can  mean  by  telling  us  that  we  have  much  to  learn  from 
modern  German  writers  on  Scripture  passes  my  com- 
prehension ! — I  can  only  suppose,  from  my  own 
acquaintance  with  them,  that  many  say  it  without  hav- 
ing read  them,  or  without  having  read  other  exposi- 
tors. 

(E.)  The  Scotch  and  English  commentators  I  shall 
pass  over  in  silence,  as  most  of  them  are  well  known. 
I  must  confess  that  I  think  we  have  little  to  show  in 
this  department  of  Theological  literature.  Of  our  old 
writers,  Rollock,  the  Scotch  divine,  is  incomparably  the 
best.  In  fact,  I  do  not  know  such  a  "buried  treasure" 
as  his  Latin  commentary  on  St.  John.* — Of  modern 
writers  Burgon  and  Wordsworth  strike  me  as  two  of 
the  most  valuable,  though  I  differ  widely  from  them  on 
such  points  as  the  Church  and  the  Sacraments.  But  I 
admire  their  reverential  spirit. — Alford  is  almost  always 
able  and  clear,  but  not  always  in  my  opinion  a  safe 
theological    guide. — A    thoroughly  satisfactory  critical 

*  Rollock  was  born  a.d.  1555,  and  died  a.d.  1598.      He  was  principaj 
of  the  University  of  Edinburgli. 


xn  PREFACE. 

commentary  on  tlie  Greek  Testament,  in  tlie  English 
language,  is  a  great  desideratum. 

I  have  only  to  add  that  on  all  points  of  philology, 
grammar,  ete.,  I  have  consulted  Flacius,  Eavanel,  Park- 
hurst,  Leigh,  Schleusner,  Kaphelius,  Suicer,  Glass! us, 
and  Winer. 

The  vexed  question  of  "various  readings,"  I  have 
deliberately  left  alone.  It  is  not  because  I  have  no 
opinion  on  the  subject.  But  the  real  extent  to  which 
all  the  various  readings  would  affect  the  meaning  of 
Scripture,  if  they  were  admitted,  is  so  much  exa,ggerated, 
that  it  does  not  seem  to  me  worth  while  to  mix  up  the 
question  with  such  a  work  as  that  which  I  have  under- 
taken. The  Greek  text  which  I  have  been  content  to 
use  throughout  is  that  of  the  third  Edition  of  Stephens 
(1550),  edited  by  Scholefield.  I  do  not  say  for  a  moment 
that  it  is  the  best  text.     I  only  say  I  have  used  it. 

The  occasional  short-comings  of  our  authorized  Eng- 
lish translation  I  have  not  hesitated  to  notice.  I  have 
frequently  pointed  out  expressions  which  in  my  judg- 
ment are  not  rendered  so  literally  or  accurately  as  they 
might  have  been.  There  is  nothing  perfect  on  earth. 
Our  excellent  translators  undoubtedly  fail  occasionally 
to  give  the  full  sense  of  Greek  words,,  and  are  not  always 
sufficiently  careful  about  tenses  and  the  article.  But  it 
is  useless  to  expect  perfection  in  any  translation.  Trans- 
lators are  not  inspired,  and  are  all  liable  to  err.  The 
"  plenary  verbal  inspiration  "  which  I  firmly  maintain, 
is  that  of  the  original  text  of  Scripture,  and  not  of  any 
translation. — I  have  no  sympathy  however  with  those 
who  wish  to  have  a  new  authorized  English  version  of 
the  Bible.  I  concede  the  short-comings  of  the  old  ver- 
sion,   but  judging    by    the    specimens   of    "]iew    and 


PREFACE.  xii: 

improved  "  versions  which  I  have  seen,  I  doubt  much 
-whether  we  should  gain  anything  by  attempting  to  mend 
it.  Taking  it  for  all  in  all,  the  authorized  English  ver- 
sion is  an  admirable  translation.  I  am  quite  content  to 
"  let  well  alone." 

I  now  conclude  this  preface  with  an  earnest  prayer, 
that  it  may  please  God  to  pardon  the  many  deficiencies 
of  this  volume,  and  to  use  it  for  His  own  glory  and  the 
good  of  souls.  It  has  cost  me  a  large  amount  of  time 
and  thought  and  labour.  But  if  the  Holy  Ghost  shall 
make  it  useful  to  the  Church  of  Christ,  I  shall  feel 
abundantly  repaid. 

Ignorance  of  Scripture  is  the  root  of  every  error  in 
religion,  and  the  source  of  every  heresy.  To  be  allowed 
to  remove  a  few  grains  of  ignorance,  and  to  throw  a  few 
rays  of  light  on  God's  precious  word,  is,  in  my  opinion, 
the  greatest  honour  that  can  be  put  on  a  Christian. 

J.  C.  E7LE,  B.A., 

CHRIST    CnURCH,    OXFORD. 
Stradbroke  Vicarage,  Suffolk, 
February,  1865. 

P.S.  I  feel  it  due  to  many  of  my  readers  to  offer  some 
explanation  of  the  long  delay  which  has  taken  place 
since  the  publication  of  this  work  on  St.  John  began. 
An  interval  of  almost  five  years  has  elapsed  between 
the  publication  of  the  first  four  chapters  and  of  the  fifth 
and  sixth.  This  delay,  I  am  afraid,  has  caused  incon- 
venience  and  annoyance  in  many  quarters.  For  this  I 
am  unfeignedly  sorry. 

But  the  delay  has  been  unavoidable,  and  has  arisen 
from  circumstances  entirely  beyond  my  own  control. 
Deaths,  domestic  anxieties,  illness,  and  change  from  one 
residence  to  anotlier,  have  had  much  to  do  with  it.     Tho 


XIV  PKEFACE. 

principal  cause  has  been  my  removal  to  my  present 
parish.  The  work  was  begun  in  a  little  quiet  parish  of 
800  people.  It  has  been  resumed  in  a  widely-scattered 
parish  of  1400  people,  requiring  almost  the  whole  of 
my  attention. 

Even  now,  in  sending  forth  the  first  volume  of  the 
Expository  Thoughts  on  St.  John,"  I  dare  not  promise 
anything  certain  as  to  the  time  when  the  work  will  be 
completed.  I  have  the  will  to  finish  it,  but  I  find  it 
almost  impossible  to  secure  the  necessary  leisure.  What 
absolute  need  there  is  of  entire  freedom  from  distraction 
and  interruption  in  writing  a  Commentary,  none  know 
but  those  who  have  attempted  it.  What  endless  petty 
interruptions  a  clergyman  must  submit  to  in  a  poor  rural 
parish  of  1400  people,  where  there  is  no  resident  land- 
lord, and  no  layman  who  has  leisure,  and  where  many 
things  must  necessarily  hinge  on  the  clergyman,  no  one 
can  know  unless  he  has  filled  the  position. 

If  the  great  Head  of  the  Church  intends  me  to  finish 
this  work,  I  believe  that  He  will  make  my  way  plain, 
and  remove  all  obstacles.  But  my  readers  must  kindly 
make  allowances  for  my  altered  position.  There  are 
but  twelve  hours  in  the  day.  I  cannot  create  time.  It 
is  not  one  of  the  primary  duties  of  a  parochial  clergy- 
man's ofl&ce  to  write  Commentaries.  If  therefore  the 
work  does  not  go  on  so  fast  as  they  could  wish,  they 
must  have  the  goodness  to  consider  my  position,  and  to 
believe  that  there  is  a  cause. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


John. 

1 — 5.  Christ  eternal, — a  distinct  Person, — very  God, 
— ^the  Creator  of  all  things, — the  source  of 
aU  light  and  life 

6 — 13.  The  minister's  office,— Christ  the  light  of  the 
world, — the  wickedness  of  man, — ^the  privi- 
leges of  believers        .... 

The  reality  of  Christ's  incarnation  . 


II 


14. 

16—18. 

19—28. 
29—34. 

35—42. 
43—51. 

1—11. 

12—25. 


The  fulness  of  Christ, — ^the  superiority  of 
Christ  to  Moses, — Christ  the  Eevealer  of 
the  Father 

John  the  Baptist's  humility, — the  blindness 
of  the  unconverted  Jews    . 


PAQI 
1—4 

13—17 
24—28 

34—37 
43—46 


54— 5S 


67—71 


Christ  the  Lamb  of  God, — Christ  the  taker 
away  of  sin, — Christ  He  that  baptizeth 
with  the  Holy  Ghost  .... 

The  good  done  by  testifying  of  Christ, — the 
good  behevers  may  do  to  others 

Souls  led  by  various  ways, — Christ  in  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures, — Philip's  advice  to 
Nathanael, — High  character  of  Nathanael      75 — 80 

Matrimony  an  honourable  estate, — the  lawful- 
ness of  mirth  and  rejoicing, — Christ's  al- 
mighty power     .        ,        .        .        . 


Irreverent  use  of  holy  places  rebuked, — words 
of  Christ  long  remembered, — Christ's  per- 
fect knowledge  of  man's  heart    . 


87—02 


102— 1 08 


XVI 


TABLE   OF   CONTENTS. 


UL 


J)nN. 
1—8. 


d— 21. 


22—36. 


PAGE 

The  beginnings  of  some  Christians  very 
feeble, — the  necessity  of  the  new  birth, — 
the  Spirit's  operation  hke  the  wind    .  118 — 123 

Spiritual  ignorance, — God's  love  the  source  of 
salvation, — Christ's  death  the  means  of 
providing  salvation, — faith  the  instrument 
which  makes  salvation  ours        .        .  139 — 145 

Jealousy  and  party-spirit, — true  humility, — 
Christ's  dignity  set  forth, — salvation  a  pre- 
sent thing  .  169 — 173 


nr.      i—e 


7—2 


Baptism,  and  its  true  position,- 
human  nature 


-our  Lord's 


1^0—193 


V. 


Christ's  tact  and  condescension, — Christ's 
readiness  to  give, — the  excellence  of 
Christ's  gifts, — the  necessity  of  conviction 
of  sin, — the  uselessness  of  formal  religion, 
—Christ's  kindness  to  great  sinners    .  201 — 206 

27—30.  Christ's  deaUngs  marvellous, — grace  an  ab- 
sorbing principle, — true  converts  zealous 
to  do  good 227—232 

31^-42.  Christ's  zeal  to  do  good, — encouragement  to 
those  who  labour  fof  Christ, — men  led  to 
Christ  in  various  ways        .        .        .  237 — 241 

43 — 54.  The  rich  have  afflictions, -^the  young  may  be 
sick  and  die, — affliction  a  blessing, — Christ's 
word  as  good  as  His  presence    .        .         251 — 255 

The  misery  caused  by  sin, — the  compassion  of 
Christ, — the  lessons  that  recovery  should 


1—15. 


teach 


16—23.     Some  works  lawful  on  the  Sabbath, 
nity  and  majesty  of  Christ  . 


-the  dig- 


264—268 


276—279 


24 — 29.  Hearing  Christ  the  way  to  salvation, — the 
privileges  of  true  believers, — Christ's  power 
to  give  life, — the  final  resurrection  of  all 
the  dead 289—293 


TABLE   OF   CONTENTS.  Xvii 

John.  PAufi 

V.  30 — 39.  The  honour  Christ  puts  on  His  servants, — 
the  honour  Christ  puts  on  miracles, — the 
honour  Christ  puts  on  the  Scriptures  300—303 

40 — i1.  The  reason  why  many  are  lost, — one  principal 
cause  of  unbehef, — Christ's  testimony  to 
Moses 313—318 

VX  1 — 14.  Christ's  almighty  power, — the  office  of  minis- 
ters,—the  sufficiency  of  the  Gospel  for  all 
mankind 323 — 326 

16 — 21.  Christ's  humihty, — the  trials  of  Christ's  disci- 
ples,— Christ's  power  over  the  waters  334 — 32" 

22 — 27.  Christ's  knowledge  of  man's  heart, — what 
Christ  forbids, — what  Christ  advises, — what 
Christ  promises 344 — 348 

28 — 34.  The  ignorance  of  natural  man, — the  honour 
Christ  puts  on  faith, — the  high  privileges 
of  Christ's  hearers  over  those  of  the  Jews 
in  the  wilderness        ....  355 — 358 

36—40.  Christ  the  bread  of  life, — none  cast  out, — 
the  Father's  will  about  all  who  come  to 
Christ 36^—370 

41 — 51.  Christ's  lowly  condition  an  offence  to  some, — 
man's  natural  impotence, — salvation  a  pre- 
sent thing    378—382 

52 — 59.     The  true  meaning  of  eating  Christ's  body  and 

drinkmg  Christ's  blood        .        .        .  393—396 

60 — 65.  Some  of  Christ's  sayings  hard, — danger  of 
putting  carnal  meanings  on  spiritual  words, 
— Christ's  perfect  knowledge  of  hearts  .      406 — 409 

•6—7 1.  Backsliding  an  old  sin, — Peter's  noble  declarar 
tion, — the  httle  benefit  some  get  from  reli- 
gious privileges  .....         414. — 418 


EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS 


0^  THE  GOSPELS. 


JOHN  I.  1—5. 


1  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word, 
and  the  Word  was  with  God,  and 
the  Word  was  God. 

2  The  same  was  in  the  begin- 
ning with  God. 

3  All  things  were  made  by  him ; 


and  without  him  was  not  any  thing 
made  that  was  made. 

4  In  him  was  life ;  and  the  life 
was  the  light  of  men. 

5  And  the  light  shineth  in  dark- 
ness; and  the  darkness  compre- 
hended it  not. 


The  Gospel  of  St.  John,  which  "begins  with  these  verses, 
is  in  many  respects  very  unlike  the  other  three  Gospels. 
It  contains  many  things  which  they  omit.  It  omits  many 
things  which  they  contain.  Good  reason  might  easily  be 
shown  for  this  unlikeness.  But  it  is  enough  to  remember 
that  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John  wrote  under  the 
direct  inspiration  of  God.  In  the  general  plan  of  their 
respective  Gospels,  and  in  the  particular  details, — in  every- 
thing that  they  record,  and  in  everything  that  they  do  not 
record, — they  were  all  four  equaHy  and  entirely  guided  by 
the  Holy  Ghost. 

About  the  matters  which  St.  John  was  speciaUy  inspired 
to  relate  in  his  Gospel,  one  general  remark  will  suffice. 
The  things  which  are  peculiar  to  his  Gospel  are  among  the 
most  precious  possessions  of  the  Church  of  Christ.     No 

1 


Z  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

one  of  the  four  Gospel-writers  has  given  us  such  full 
statements  about  the  divinity  of  Christ, — about  justifica- 
tion by  faith, — about  the  offices  of  Christ, — about  the  work 
of  the  Holy  Ghost, — and  about  the  privileges  of  believers, 
as  we  read  in  the  pages  of  St.  John.  On  none  of  these 
great  subjects,  undoubtedly,  have  Matthew,  Mark,  and 
Luke  been  silent.  But  in  St.  John's  Gospel,  they  stand  out 
prominently  on  the  surface,  so  that  he  who  runs  may  read. 

The  five  verses  now  before  us  contain  a  statement  of 
matchless  sublimity  concerning  the  divine  nature  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.  He  it  is,  beyond  all  question,  whom 
St.  John  means,  when  he  speaks  of  "the  Word."  No 
doubt  there  are  heights  and  depths  in  that  statement 
which  are  far  beyond  man's  understanding.  And  yet 
there  are  plain  lessons  in  it,  which  every  Christian  would 
do  well  to  treasure  up  in  his  mind. 

We  learn,  firstly,  that  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  eternal. 
St.  John  tells  us  that  "  in  the  beginning  w^s  the  Word." 
He  did  not  begin  to  exist  when  the  heavens  and  the  earth 
were  made.  Much  less  did  He  begin  to  exist  when  the 
Gospel  was  brought  into  the  world.  He  had  glory  with 
the  Father  '•  before  the  world  was."  (John  xvii.  5.)  He 
was  existing  when  matter  was  first  created,  and  before 
time  began.  He  was  "  before  all  things."  (Col.  i.  17.)  He 
was  from  all  eternity. 

We  learn,  secondly,  that  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  a  Per- 
son distinct  from  God  the  Father^  and  yet  one  with  Him, 
St.  John  tells  us  that  "  the  Word  was  with  God."  The 
Father  and  the  Word,  though  two  persons,  are  joined  by 
an  inefiable  union.  Where  God  the  Father  was  from  all 
eternity,  there  also  was  the  Word,  even  God  the  Son, — 
their  glory  equal,  their  majesty  co-eternal,  and  yet  their 
Godhead  one.  This  is  a  great  mystery!  Happy  is  he 
who  can  receive  it  as  a  little  child,  without  attemptuig 
to  explain  it. 


3 

"We  learn,  thirdly,  that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  very 
God.  St.  John  tells  ns  that  "  the  Word  was  God."  He 
is  not  merely  a  created  angel,  or  a  being  inferior  to  God 
the  Father,  and  invested  by  Him  with  power  to  redeem 
sinners.  He  is  nothing  less  than  perfect  God, — equal  to 
the  Father  as  touching  His  Godhead, — God  of  the  sub- 
stance of  the  Father,  begotten  before  the  worlds. 

We  learn,  fourthly,  that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  the 
Creator  of  all  things.  St.  John  tells  us  that  "  by  Him 
were  all  things  made,  and  without  Him  was  not  any  thing 
made  that  was  made."  So  far  from  being  a  creature  of 
God,  as  some  heretics  have  falsely  asserted,  He  ia  the  Being 
who  made  the  worlds  and  all  that  they  contain.  "  He 
commanded  and  they  were  created."  (Psalm  xl.  8.) 

We  learn,  lastly,  that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  the  source 
of  all  spiritual  life  and  light.  St.  John  tells  us,  that  "  in 
Him  was  life,  and  the  life  was  the  light  of  men."  He  is 
the  eternal  fountain,  from  which  alone  the  sons  of  men 
have  ever  derived  life.  Whatever  spiritual  life  and  light 
Adam  and  Eve  possessed  before  the  fall,  w^as  from  Christ. 
Whatever  deliverance  from  sin  and  spiritual  death  any  child 
of  Adam  has  ever  enjoyed  since  the  fall,  whatever  light  of 
conscience  or  understanding  any  one  has  obtained,  all  has 
flowed  from  Christ.  The  vast  majority  of  mankind  in 
every  age  have  refused  to  Iqiow  Him,  have  forgotten  the 
fall,  and  their  own  need  of  a  Saviour.  The  light  has  been 
constantly  shining  "in  darkness."  The  most  have  "not 
comprehended  the  light."  But  if  any  men  and  women  out 
of  the  countless  millions  of  mankind  have  ever  had  spiritual 
life  and  light,  they  have  owed  all  to  Christ. 

Such  is  a  brief  summary  of  the  leading  lessons  which 
these  wonderful  verses  appear  to  contain.  There  is  much 
in  them,  without  controversy,  which  is  above  our  reason ; 
but  there  is  nothing  contrary  to  it.  There  is  much  that 
we  cannot  explain,  and  must  be  content  humbly  to  believe, 


4  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Let  ns  however  never  forget  that  there  are  plain  practical 
consequences  flowing  from  the  passage,  which  we  can  never 
grasp  too  firmly,  or  know  too  well. 

Would  we  know,  for  one  thing,  the  exceeding  sinfulness 
of  sin?  Let  ns  often  read  these  first  five  verses  of  St. 
John's  Gospel.  Let  us  mark  what  kind  of  Being  the 
Redeemer  of  mankind  must  needs  be,  in  order  to  provide 
eternal  redemption  for  sinners.  If  no  one  less  than  the 
Eternal  God,  the  Cre-ator  and  Preserver  of  all  things, 
could  take  away  the  sin  of  the,  world,  sin  must  be  a  far 
more  abominable  thing  in  the  sight  of  God  than  most  men 
suppose.  The  right  measure  of  sin's  sinfulness  is  the  dig- 
nity of  Him  who  came  into  the  world  to  save  sinners.  If 
Christ  is  so  great,  then  sin  must  indeed  be  sinful ! 

Would  we  know,  for  another  thing,  the  strength  of  a 
true  Christian's  foundation  for  hope  ?  Let  us  often  read 
these  first  five  verses  of  St.  John's  Gospel.  Let  us  mark 
that  the  Saviour  in  whom  the  believer  is  bid  to  trust  is 
nothing  less  than  the  Eternal  God,  One  able  to  save  to  the 
uttermost  all  that  come  to  the  Father  by  Him.  He  that 
was  "  with  God,"  and  "  was  God,"  is  also  "  Emmanuel,  God 
with  us."  Let  us  thank  God  that  our  help  is  laid  on  One 
that  is  mighty.  (Psalm  Ixxxix.  19.)  In  ourselves  we  are 
great  sinners.  But  in  Jesus  Christ  we  have  a  great  Saviour, 
He  is  a  strong  foundation-stone,  able  to  bear  the  weight  of 
a  world's  sin.  He  that  believeth  on  Him  shall  not  be  con- 
founded. (1  Peter  ii.  6.) 

Notes.     John  I.  1 — 5. 

[T7ie  Gospel  according  to  St.  John.]  The  following  prefatory 
remarks  on  St.  John's  Gospel,  may  prove  useful  to  some  readers. 

Firstly. — There  is  no  doubt  that  this  Gospel  was  written  by  John, 
the  Apostle,  the  son  of  Zebodee,  and  brother  of  James,  once  a 
fisherman  on  the  sea  of  Galilee,  and  aferwards  called  to  be  a 
disciple  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  an  eye-witness  of  all  Christ's  minis- 
try, and   a  pillar  of  the  church.     John,   be  it   remembered,  i« 


JOHN,    CHAP.    I.  5 

specially  called  "  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved."  He  was  one 
of  the  chosen  three  who  alone  saw  the  daughter  of  Jairus  raised 
— were  eye-witnesses  of  the  transfiguration — and  were  by-stand- 
ers  during  our  Lord's  agony  in  the  garden.  He  was  the  one 
who  leaned  on  Christ's  breast  at  the  last  supper,  and  to  whom 
our  Lord  committed  the  care  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  when  lie  waa 
dying  on  the  cross.  It  is  an  interesting  fact,  that  he  was  the 
disciple  who  was  specially  inspired  to  write  the  deepest  things 
concerning  Christ. 
Secondly. — There  is  little  doubt  that  this  Gospel  was  written  at  a 
much  later  date  than  the  other  three  Gospels.  How  much 
later,  and  at  what  precise  time,  we  do  not  know.  It  is  commonly 
supposed  that  it  was  written  after  the  rise  of  heresies  about  the 
Person  and  natures  of  Christ,  such  as  those  attributed  to  Ebioh 
and  Cerinthus.  It  is  not  likely  that  it  was  written  at  so  late  a 
period  as  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  If  this  had  been  the 
case,  John  would  hardly  have  spoken  of  ti.9  "  sheep-market "  at 
Jerusalem  as  still  standing.  (John  v.  2.) 

Thirdly. — The  substance  of  this  Gospel  is,  for  the  most  part, 
pecuhar  to  itself.  With  the  exception  of  the  crucifixion,  and  a 
few  other  matters,  the  things  which  St.  John  was  inspired  to 
record  concerning  our  Lord,  are  only  found  in  his  gospel.  He 
says  nothing  about  our  Lord's  birth  and  infancy, — His  tempta- 
tion,— the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, — the  transfiguration, — the 
prophecy  about  Jerusalem,  and  the  appointment  of  the  Lord's 
Supper.  He  gives  us  very  few  miracles,  and  even  fewer  para- 
bles. But  the  things  which  John  does  relate  are  among  the 
most  precious  treasures  which  Christians  possess.  The  chapters 
about  Nicodemus, — the  woman  of  Samaria, — the  raising  of  Laza- 
rus, and  our  Lord's  appearance  to  Peter  after  His  resurrection 
at  the  sea  of  Galilee, — the  public  discourses  of  the  fifth,  sixth, 
seventh,  eighth,  and  tenth  chapters, — the  private  discourses  of 
the  thirteenth,  fourteenth,  fifteenth,  and  sixteenth  chapters, — 
and,  above  aU,  the  prayer  of  the  seventeenth  chapter,  are  some 
of  the  most  valuable  portions  of  the  Bible.  All  these  chapters, 
be  it  remembered,  we  owe  to  St.  John. 

Fourthly. — The  style  of  this  Gospel  is  no  less  peculiar  than  its 
substance.  There  appears  extraordinary  simplicity  in  many  of 
its  statements,  and  yet  there  is  a  depth  about  them  which  no 
man  can  entirely  fatiiom. — It  contains  many  expressions  which 
are  used  in  a  profound  and  spiritual  sense,  such  as  "hght," 
"darkness,"  "world,"  "life,"  "truth,"  "to  abide,"  "  to  know." — 
It  contains  two  names  of  the  second  and  third  Persons  of  the 
Trinity,  not  found  in  the  other  Gospels.  These  are,  "  the  Word," 
as  a  name  of  our  Lord,  and  "  the  Comforter,"  as  a  name  of  the 
Holy  Ghost. — It  contains,  fi:om  time  to  time,  explanatory  com- 
ments and  remarks  on  our  Lord's  words. — Moreover,  it  contains 


6  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

frequent  short  explanations  of  Jewish  customs  and  terms,  which 
serve  to  show  that  it  was  not  written  so  much  for  Jewish  read- 
ers as  for  the  whole  church  throughout  the  world.  "  Matthew," 
(says  Gregory  Nazianzen,  quoted  by  Ford,)  "  wrote  fur  the  He- 
brews ;  Mark,  for  the  Italians ;  Luke,  for  the  Greeks ;  the  great 
herald,  John,  for  all." 

Lastly. — The  preface  of  this  Gospel  is  one  of  the  most  striking 
peculiarities  about  the  whole  book.  Under  the  term  preface,  I 
include  the  first  eighteen  verses  of  the  first  chapter.  This  pre- 
face forms  the  quintessence  of  the  whole  book,  and  is  composed 
of  simple,  short,  condensed  propositions.  Nowhere  in  the  Bible 
shall  we  find  such  clear  and  distinct  statements  about  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ's  divine  nature.  Nowhere  shall  we  find  so  many 
expressions,  which  for  want  of  mental  power,  no  mortal  man 
can  fully  grasp  or  explain.  In  no  portion  of  Scripture  is  it  so 
deeply  important  to  notice  each  word,  and  even  each  tense  em- 
ployed in  each  sentence.  In  no  portion  of  Scripture  do  the  per- 
fect grammatical  accuracy  and  verbal  precision  of  an  inspired 
composition  shine  out  so  brightly.  It  is  not,  perhaps,  too  much 
to  say,  that  not  a  single  word  could  be  altered  in  the  first  five 
verses  of  St.  John's  Gospel,  without  opening  the  door  to  some 
heresy. 

The  first  verse  of  St.  John's  Gospel,  in  particular,  has  always 
been  allowed  to  be  one  of  the  sublimest  verses  in  the  Bible. 
The  ancients  used  to  say  that  it  deserved  to  be  written  in  golden 
letters  in  every  Christian  Church.  It  has  well  been  said  to  be  an 
opening  worthy  of  him  whom  Jesus  called  "  a  son  of  thunder." 

1. — [In  the  beginning,  <!rc.]  This  wonderful  verse  contains  three 
things.  It  tells  us  that  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  here  called  the 
Word,  is  eternal, — that  He  is  a  distinct  Person  from  God  the 
Father,  and  yet  most  intimately  united  to  him, — and  that  He 
is  God.  The  term  "  God,"  be  it  remembered,  in  the  second 
clause,  is  to  be  taken  personally,  for  God  the  Father,  and  in  the 
third  to  be  taken  essentially,  as  signifymg  the  Divine  Being. 

The  expression,  "  in  the  beginning,"  means  in  the  beginning 
of  all  creation.  It  is  like  the  first  verse  of  Genesi.^,  ''  In  the 
beginning  God  created  the  heavens  and  the  earth."  (Gen.  i.  I.) 

The  expression  "was"  means  "  existed,  was  existing."  The 
whole  sentence  signifies  that  when  the  world  was  fist  called 
into  bein'r,  however  long  ago  that  may  be, — when  matter  was 
first  formed,  however  many  millions  of  ages  ago  that  may  be, — 
at  that  pcrio;!  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  was  existing.  He  had  no 
beginning.  He  was  before  aU  things.  There  never  was  the 
time  when  He  was  not.  In  shcrt,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  an 
eternal  Be  ng. 


Several  of  the  fathers  dwell  strongly  on  the  immense  import- 
ance of  the  word  "was"  in  this  sentence,  and  on  the  fact  that  it 
is  four  times  repeated  in  the  two  first  verses  of  this  Gospel.  It 
is  not  said,  "the  Word  was  made,"  but  "the  Word  was."  Basil 
says,  "Those  two  terms,  'beginning'  and  'was,'  are  Uke  two 
anchors,"  which  the  ship  of  a  man's  soul  may  safely  ride  at, 
whatever  storms  of  heresy  may  come. 

The  expression,  "the  Word,"  is  a  very  difficult  one,  and  is 
pecuUar  to  St,  John,  I  see  no  clear  proof  that  it  is  used  by  any 
other  New  Testament  writer.  The  texts,  Acts  xx.  32,  and  Heb. 
iv.  12,  are,  to  say  the  least,  doubtful  proofs.  That  it  here  signi- 
fies a  "  person,"  and  not  a  spoken  word,  and  that  it  is  applied  to 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  is  clear  from  the  after  sentence,  "  The 
Word  was  made  flesh,  and  dwelt  among  us."  That  it  was  a  term 
famihar  to  the  Jews  is  undeniable.  But  why  this  particular 
name  is  used  by  St,  John,  both  here  and  in  his  other  writings, 
is  a  point  on  which  commentators  have  differed  greatly. 

Some  think,  as  Tertullian,  Zwingle,  Musculus,  Bucer,  and 
Calvin,  that  Christ  is  called  "the  Word  "  because  He  is  the  wis- 
dom of  God,  and  the  "  wisdom  "  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs.  These 
would  have  the  expression  translated,  "  reason,  wisdom,  or 
counsel," 

Some  think,  as  some  of  the  fathers,  that  Christ  is  called  "  the 
Word,"  because  He  is  the  image  and  oflfspring  of  the  Father's 
mind,  "  the  express  image  of  the  Father's  person,"  just  as  our 
words,  if  honest  and  sincere,  are  the  image  and  representation 
of  our  minds. 

Some  think,  as  Cartwright  and  Tittman,  that  Christ  is  called 
"  the  Word,"  because  He  is  the  Person  who  is  spoken  of  in  all 
the  Old  Testament  promises,  and  the  subject  of  prophecy. 

Some  think,  as  Melancthon,  RoUock,  Gomarus,  and  Scott,  that 
Christ  is  called  "  the  Word,"  because  He  is  the  speaker,  utterer, 
and  interpreter  of  God  the  Father's  will.  It  is  written  in  this 
very  chapter,  that  "  the  only  begotten  Son  hath  declared  the 
Father."  It  is  also  written,  that  "  God  hath  in  these  last  days 
spolcen  unto  us  by  his  Son,"  (Heb.  i.  1,) 

I  think  the  last  of  these  views  the  simplest  and  most  satis- 
factory. All  of  them  are  at  best  only  conjectures.  There  is 
probably  something  about  the  expression  which  has  not  yet  been 
discovered. 

It  is  thought  by  many  that  the  expression  "  the  Word,"  is 
used  in  several  places  of  the  Old  Testament,  concerning  the 
Second  Person  in  the  Trinity.  Such  places  are  Psalm  xxxiii.  6 ; 
Psalm  cvii.  20,  and  2  Sam.  vii.  21,  compared  with  1  Chron.  xvii. 


EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

19.  The  proof  in  all  these  cases  is  somewhat  doubtful.  Never- 
theless the  idea  is  strengthened  by  the  fact  that  in  Rabbinical 
writings  the  Messiah  is  often  spoken  of  as  "  the  Word."  In  the 
third  of  Genesis,  the  Chaldee  paraphrase  says  that  Adam  and 
Eve  "  heard  the  Word  of  the  Lord  walking  in  the  garden." 

Arrowsmith,  in  his  admirable  work  on  this  chapter,  suggests 
a  probable  reason  why  John  did  not  say,  "In  the  beginning  was 
the  Son  of  God,"  but  "  the  Word."—"  John  would  not  at  first 
ahenate  the  hearts  of  his  readers.  He  knew  that  neither  Jews 
nor  Gentiles  would  endure  the  term,  the  Son  of  God.  They 
could  not  endure  to  hear  of  a  sonship  in  the  Deity  and  Godhead : 
but  with  this  term  '  Word,'  applied  to  the  Godhead,  they  were 
well  acquainted." — Poole  observes  that  no  term  was  so  abhorred 
by  the  Jews  as  the  term  "  Son  of  God." — Ferus  remarks,  that 
by  calHng  our  Lord  "the  Word,"  St.  John  excludes  all  idea  of  a 
material,  carnal  relationship  between  the  Father  and  the  Son. 
Tliis  is  also  shown  by  Suicer  to  be  the  view  of  Chrysostom, 
Theodoret,  Basil,  Gregory,  Nyssen,  and  Theophylact. 

Whatever  difl5culty  we  may  feel  about  this  expression,  "  the 
Word,"  in  our  times,  there  does  not  seem  to  have  been  the  same 
difficulty  felt  about  it,  either  by  Jews  or  Gentiles,  when  St.  John 
wrote  his  Gospel.  To  say,  as  some  have  done,  that  he  borrowed 
the  expression  from  the  philosophers  of  his  time,  is  dishonouring 
to  inspiration.  But  we  may  safely  say  that  he  used  an  expres- 
sion, of  which  the  meaning  was  quite  familiar  to  the  first  readers 
of  his  Gospel,  as  a  name  of  the  Second  Person  of  the  Trinity. 
With  this  we  may  be  content.  Those  who  wish  more  informa- 
tion, should  consult  VVitsius'  Dissertation  on  the  Word  Logos, 
Suicer's  Thesaurus,  and  Adam  Clarke's  Commentary. 

[The  word  was  with  God.]  This  sentence  means,  that  from  all 
eternity  there  was  a  most  intimate  and  ineffable  union  between 
the  first  and  second  Persons  in  the  blessed  Trinity, — between 
Christ  the  Word,  and  God  the  Father.  And  yet,  though  thus 
inefiably  united,  the  Word  and  the  Father  were  from  all  e-ternity 
two  distinct  Persons.  "  It  was  He,"  says  Pearson,  to  whom  the 
Father  said,  "  Let  us  make  man  in  our  image."  (Gen.  i.  26.) 

The  truth  contained  in  this  sentence,  is  one  of  the  deepest 
and  most  mysterious  in  the  whole  range  of  Christian  theology. 
The  nature  of  this  union  between  the  Father  and  the  Son,  we 
have  no  mental  capacity  to  explain.  Augustine  draws  illustra- 
tions from  the  sun  and  its  rays,  and  from  fire  and  the  light  of 
fire,  which,  though  two  distinct  things,  are  yet  inseparably 
united,  so  that  where  the  one  is  the  other  is.  But  all  illustra- 
tio.is  on  such  subjects  halt  and  fail.  Hiire,  at  any  rate,  it  is 
better  to  believe  than  to  attempt  to  explain.  Our  Lord  saya 
in  the  Father  and  the  Father  in  me."     "J 


JOHN,    CHAP.    I.  9 

and  the  Father  are  one."  ''  He  that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen 
the  Father."  (John  xiv.  9—11;  John  x.  30.)  Let  us  be  fully- 
persuaded  t^i  at  the  Father  and  the  Son  are  two  distinct  Per- 
sons in  the  Trinity,  co-equal  and  co-eternal, — and  yet  that  they 
are  one  in  substance  and  inseparably  united  and  undivided.  Let 
us  p^rasp  firmly  the  words  of  the  Athanasian  Creed,  "  Neither 
confounding  the  Persons  nor  dividing  the  substance."  But  here 
let  us  stop. 

Musculus  remarks  on  this  sentence,  how  carefully  St.  John 
writes  that  "  the  Word  was  with  God,"  and  not  "  God  was  with 
God."  He  would  have  us  remember  that  there  are  not  two 
Gods  but  one.  And  yet  "  the  Word  was  with  God,  and  was 
God." 

[The  Word  was  God.]  This  sentence  means  that  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  the  eternal  Word,  was  in  nature,  essence,  and  sub- 
stance very  God,  and  that  "as  the  Father  is  God,  so  also  the  Son 
is  God."  It  seems  impossible  to  assert  Christ's  divinity  more 
distinctly  than  it  is  here  asserted.  The  sentence  cannot  possibly 
mean  that  the  Father  is  God,  since  no  one  ever  thought  of  dis- 
puting that.  Nor  yet  can  it  possibly  mean  that  the  title  ctf  God 
was  conferred  on  some  being  inferior  to  God  and  uncreated,  as 
the  princes  of  this  world  are  called  "  gods."  He  who  is  here 
called  God,  is  the  same  who  was  uncreated  and  eternal.  There 
is  no  inferiority  in  the  Word  to  God  the  Father.  The  Godhead 
of  the  Father,  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  is  all  one.  To 
maintain  in  the  face  of  such  a  text,  as  some  so-called  Ciiristians 
do,  that  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  was  only  a  man,  is  a  mournful 
proof  of  the  perversity  of  the  human  heart. 

The  whole  verse,  honestly  and  impartially  interpreted,  is  an 
unanswerable  argument  against  three  classes  of  heretics.  It 
confutes  the  Arians,  who  regard  Christ  as  a  Being  inferior  to 
God. — It  confutes  the  Sabelhans,  who  deny  any  distinction  of 
Persons  in  the  Trinity,  and  say  that  God  sometimes  manifested 
Himself  as  the  Father,  sometimes  as  the  Son,  and  sometimes  as 
the  Spirit,  and  that  the  Father  and  the  Spirit  suffered  on  the 
cross! — Above  all  it  confutes  the  Socinians  and  Unitarians  who 
say  that  Jesus  Christ  was  not  God  but  man,  a  most  holy  and 
perfect  man,  but  only  a  man. 

In  leaving  this  verse,  it  is  useless  to  deny  that  there  are  deep 
mysteries  in  it  which  man  has  no  mind  to  comprehend,  and  no 
language  to  express.  How  there  can  be  a  plurahty  in  unity, 
and  a  unity  in  plurahty,  three  Persons  in  the  Trinity  and  One 
God  in  essence, — how  Christ  can  be  at  the  same  time  iji  the 
Father,  as  regards  the  unity  of  the  essence,  and  with  the  Father, 
as  regards  tiie  distinction  of  his  Person, — these  are  matters  far 
beyond  our  feeble  understanding.     Happy  are  we,  if  we  can 

1* 


10  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

agree  with  Bernard's  devout  remark  about  the  subject,  "It  is 
rashness  to  search  too  far  into  it.  It  is  piety  tobeheve  it.  It  is 
life  eternal  to  know  it.  And  we  can  never  have  a  full  ccmpre- 
hcfi.sion  of  it,  till  we  come  to  enjoy  it," 

2.  — [I'Ae  same  was  in  the  heginniyig,  &c.'\  This  verse  contains  an 
emphatic  repetition  of  the  second  clause  of  the  preceding  verse. 
St.  John  anticipates  the  possible  objection  of  some  perverse 
mind,  that  perhaps  there  was  a  time  when  Christ,  the  Word, 
was  not  a  distinct  Person  in  the  Trinity.  In  reply  to  this  objec- 
tion, he  declares  that  the  same  Word  who  was  eternal,  and  was 
God,  was  also  from  all  eternity  a  Person  in  the  Godhead  distinct 
from  God  the  Father,  and  yet  with  Him  by  a  most  intimate  and 
ineffable  union.  In  short,  there  never  was  a  time  when  Christ 
was  not  "  with  God." 

There  are  two  passages  in  the  Old  Testament  which  throw 
strong  light  on  the  doctrine  of  this  verse.  The  one  is  in  the 
Book  of  Proverbs  viii.  22 — 31.  The  other  is  in  Zechariah  xiii. 
7.  The  passage  in  Proverbs  seems  intended  to  explain  the 
verse  before  us.  The  passage  in  Zechariah  contains  an  expres- 
sion which  is  almost  a  parallel  to  the  expression  "  with  God." 
"  Awake,  0  sword,  against  my  shepherd,  and  against  the  man 
that  is  my  fellow,  saith  the  Lord."  "The  man  that  is  my 
fellow,"  according  to  the  best  commentators,  means  the  Messiah, 
Jesus  Christ,  and  a  reference  to  Poole's  Synopsis  will  show  that 
the  words  signify  "  the  man  that  is  near  me,  or  joined  to  me." 

Arrowsmith  says,  "  Ask  the  sun,  if  ever  it  were  without  its 
beams.  Ask  the  fountain,  if  ever  it  were  without  its  streams. 
So  God  was  never  without  His  Son." 

We  must  not  suppose  that  the  repetition  of  this  second  verse 
is  useless  or  unmeaning.  Arrowsmith  remarks  that"Eepeti- 
tions  have  divers  uses  in  Scripture.  In  prayer  they  argue  affec- 
tion. In  prophecy  they  note  celerity  and  certainty.  In  threat- 
enings  they  note  unavoidableness  and  suddenness.  In  precepts 
they  note  a  necessity  of  performing  them.  In  truths^  like  that 
before  us,  they  serve  to  show  the  necessity  of  believing  and 
knowing  them." 
3.— [AZZ  things.. .made  hy  Am.]  This  sentence  means  that  creation 
was  the  work  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  no  less  than  of  God  the 
Father.  "By  him  were  all  things  created."  (Coloss.  i.  16.) 
"  Thou  Lord  in  the  beginning  hast  laid  the  foundation  of  the 
earth."  (Heb.  i.  10.)  Now  He  that  made  all  things  must  needs 
be  God. 

The  expression,  we  must  carefully  remember,  does  not  imply 
any  inferiority  of  God  the  Son  to  God  the  Father,  as  if  God 
the  Son  was  only  the  agent  and  workman  under  another.  Nor 
yet  does  it  imply  that  creation  was  in  no  sense  the  work  of  God 


JOHN,    CHAP.   I  11 

the  Father,  and  that  He  is  not  the  maker  of  heaven  and  earth. 
But  it  does  imply  that  such  is  the  dignity  of  the  eternal  Word, 
that  in  creation  as  well  as  in  every  thing  else.  He  co-operated 
with  the  Father.  "  What  things  soever  the  Father  doeth, 
these  also  doeth  the  Son  likewise."  (John  v.  19.)  "By  whom 
also  He  made  the  worlds."  (Heb.  i.  2.)  When  we  read  the 
expression  "  by  me  kings  reign,"  (Prov.  viii.  15,)  we  do  not  for 
a  moment  suppose,  that  kings  are  superior  in  dignity  to  Him  by 
whom  they  reign. 

Jansenius  remarks  that  this  verse  completely  overthrows  the 
heretical  notion  entertained  by  the  Manichees  that  the  material 
world  was  formed  by  an  evil  spirit,  as  well  as  the  notion  of  the 
Platonic  school  that  some  part  of  creation  was  made  by  angels 
and  demons. 

[Without  him  was  not  anything  made,  &c.]  This  sentence 
appears  added,  to  show  the  utter  impossibility  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  being  no  more  than  a  created  being.  If  not  even 
the  slightest  thing  was  created  without  Him,  it  is  plain  that  He 
cannot  possibly  be  a  creature  Himself 

The  fathers  raised  curious  speculations  about  the  origin  of 
evil  from  the  expression  now  before  us.  "  If  nothing  was  made 
without  Christ,"  theyargued,  "from  whence  came  sin?"  The 
simplest  answer  to  this  question  is,  that  sin  was  not  among  the 
things  which  were  originally  created  at  the  beginning.  It  came 
in  afterwards,  at  the  fall,  "By  one  m.an  sin  entered  into  the 
world."  (Rom.  v.  12.)  That  it  could  not  have  entered  without 
divine  permission,  and  that  its  entrance  has  been  overruled  to 
the  display  of  divine  mercy  in  redemption,  are  undeniable  truths. 
But  we  have  no  right  to  say  that  sin  was  among  the  "all 
things,"  which  were  "made  by  Christ." 

L  —[In  Him  was  life.l  This  sentence  means  that  in  the  eternal 
counsels  of  the  Trinity,  Christ  was  appointed  to  be  the  source, 
fountain,  origin,  and  cause  of  hfe.  From  Him  all  life  was  to 
iSow.  As  to  the  kind  of  "  life"  which  is  here  meant,  there  is 
much  difference  of  opinion  among  commentators. 

Some  think  as  Cyril,  Theophylact,  Chemnitius,  and  Calvin, 
that  the  expression  refers  specially  to  the  continued  preservation 
of  all  created  things  by  Christ's  providence.  Having  created  all 
things,  He  keeps  all  ahve  and  in  order. 

Some  think  as  Zwingle,  Cartwright,  Arrowsmith,  Poole, 
Alford,  and  most  modern  commentators,  that  the  expression  in- 
cludes all  sorts  of  life,  both  vegetable,  animal,  and  spiritual. 
"  Thou  sendest  forth  thy  spirit,  and  they  are  created."  (Psalm 
civ.  30.)  "  In  Him  we  live,  and  move,  and  have  our  beiag." 
(Acis  xvii.  28.) 


12  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Some  think,  as  Luther,  Melancthon,  Bre^tius,  Flacius,  Liglit- 
foot,  Lampe,  and  Pearce,  that  tlie  expression  apphes  solely  to 
spiritual  life,  and  that  it  is  meant  to  declare  that  Christ  alone  is 
the  source  of  all  life  to  the  souls  of  men,  whether  in  time  or 
eternity.  He  was  the  creator  of  all  things,  and  He  also  was 
the  author  of  new  creation.  To  this  opinion  I  decidedly  incline. 
For  one  thing,  natural  life  seems  already  included  in  the  pre- 
ceding verse  about  cieation.  For  another  thing,  it  is  the  view 
which  seems  to  agree  best  with  the  conclusion  of  the  verse,  and 
to  be  in  harmony  with  the  words,  ''  With  thee  is  the  fountain  of 
life  :  in  thy  hght  we  shall  see  light."  "  God  hath  given  to  us 
eternal  Ufe,  and  this  life  is  in  His  Son."  (Psalm  sxxvi.  9;  1 
John  V.  11.) 

[The  Ufe  was  the  light  of  men.]  This  sentence  means  that  the 
life  which  was  in  Christ,  was  intended  before  the  fall  to  be  the 
guide  of  man's  soul  to  heaven,  and  the  supply  of  man's  heart 
and  conscience, — and  that  since  the  fall  of  man  it  has  been  the 
salvation  and  the  comfort  of  all  who  have  been  saved.  It  is 
those  and  those  only  who  have  followed  Christ  as  their  Tght, 
who  have  lived  before  God  and  reached  heaven.  There  has 
never  been  any  spiritual  life  or  light  enjoyed  by  men,  excepting 
from  Christ. 

5. — [The  light  shineth  in  darhness.']  This  sentence  means  that  the 
spiritual  hght  which  Chiist,  the  source  of  life,  offers  to  man,  has 
always  been  neglected  since  the  fall,  and  is  still  neglected  by  un- 
regenerate  men.  It  has  been  like  a  candle  shining  in  a  dark 
place,  a  light  in  the  middle  of  a  world  of  darkness, — making  the 
darkness  more  visible.  Unregenerate  men  are  darkness  itself 
about  spiritual  things.     "Ye  were  darkness."  (Ephes.  v.  8.) 

Arrowsmith  remarks  on  this  sentence,  "  Christ  hath  shined  in 
all  ages  in  the  works  of  creation  and  providence.  He  left  not 
Himself  without  witness.  Every  creature  is  a  kind  of  professor 
that  readeth  man  a  lecture  concerning  God,  of  His  wisdom,  and 
power,  and  goodness." 

[The  darkness  comprehended  it  not.']  This  sentence  means 
that  the  natural  heart  of  man  has  always  been  so  dark  since  the 
fall,  that  the  great  majority  of  mankind  have  neither  understood, 
nor  received,  nor  laid  hold  upon  the  light  offered  to  them  by 
Christ. 

The  difference  in  the  tenses  of  the  tv/o  verbs  used  in  this 
verse  is  very  remarkable.  About  the  "  light"  the  present 
tense  is  used ;  "  It  shineth  now  as  it  has  always  shone  ;  it  is 
still  shining." — About  the  "  darkness"  the  past  ten-e  is  used ; 
"  It  has  not  comprehended  the  light ;  it  never  has  compre- 
hended it  from  the  first,  and  does  not  comprehend  it  at  the  pre- 
sent day." 


JOHN,    CHAP.    I. 


13 


The  Grreek  word  which  we  render  "comprehended,"  is  the 
same  that  is  used  in  Ephes.  iii,  18.  In  Acts  iv.  14,  it  is  trans- 
lated "perceived," — in  Rom.  ix.  30,  "  attained," — in  Phihpp.  iii. 
13,  "apprehend," — in  John  viii.  3,  "taken," — and  in  1  Thess.  v. 
4,  "  overtake." 

At  this  point,  the  remark  of  Bengel  upon  the  whole  passage 
deserves  attention.  "  In  the  first  and  second  verses  of  this 
chapter,  mention  is  made  of  a  state  before  the  creation  of  the 
world ;  in  the  third  verse,  the  world's  creation ;  in  the  fourth, 
the  time  of  man's  uprightness ;  in  the  fifth,  the  time  of  man's 
decUne  and  fall." 

I  cannot  close  these  notes  on  the  opening  verses  of  St.  John's 
Gospel  without  expressing  my  deep  sense  of  the  utter  inability 
of  any  human  commentator  to  enter  fully  into  the  vast  and 
sublime  truths  which  the  passage  contains.  I  have  laboured  to 
throw  a  little  light  on  the  passage,  and  have  not  hesitated  to  ex- 
ceed the  average  length  of  these  notes  on  account  of  the  immense 
importance  of  this  part  of  Scripture.  But  after  saying  all  that  I 
have  said,  I  feel  as  if  I  had  only  faintly  touched  the  surface  of 
the  passage.  There  is  something  here  which  nothing  but  the 
light  of  eternity  will  ever  fully  reveal. 


JOHN  I.  6—13. 


6  There  was  a  man  sent  from 
God,  whose  name  was  John. 

t  The  same  came  for  a  witness, 
to  bear  witness  of  the  Light,  that 
all  men  through  him  mighi  believe. 

8  He  was  not  that  Light,  but  loas 
sent  to  bear  witness  of  that  Light. 

9  That  was  the  true  Light, 
which  light eth  every  man  that 
Cometh  into  the  world. 

10  He  was  in  the  world,  and  the 


world  was  made  by  him,  and  the 
world  knew  him  not. 

11  He  came  unto  his  own,  and 
his  own  received  him  not. 

12  But  as  many  as  received  him, 
to  them  gave  he  power  to  become 
the  sons  of  God,  even  to  them  that 
beheve  on  his  name : 

13  Which  were  born,  not  of 
blood,  nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh, 
nor  of  the  wiU  of  man,  but  of  God. 


St.  John,  after  beginning  his  gospel  with  a  statement  of 
our  Lord's  nature  as  God,  proceeds  to  speak  of  His  fore- 
runner, John  the  Baptist.  The  contrast  between  the  lan- 
guage used  about  the  Saviour,  and  that  used  about  His 
forerunner,  ought  not  to  be  overlooked.  Of  Christ  we  are 
told  that  He  was  the  eternal  God, — the  Creator    of  all 


14  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

things,— -the  source  of  life  and  light.  Of  John  the  Baptist 
we  are  told  simply,  that  "  there  was  a  man  sent  from  God, 
whose  name  was  John." 

We  see,  firstly,  in  these  verses,  the  true  nature  of  a 
Christian  miiiister^s  office.  We  have  it  in  the  description 
of  John  the  Baptist :  "  He  came  for  a  witness,  to  bear  wit 
ness  of  the  light,  that  all  men  through  him  might  believe." 

Christian  ministers  are  not  priests,  nor  mediators  between 
God  and  man.  They  are  not  agents  into  whose  hands  men 
may  commit  their  souls,  and  carry  on  their  religion  by 
deputy.  They  are  witnesses.  They  are  intended  to  bear 
testimony  to  God's  truth,  and  specially  to  the  great  truth 
that  Christ  is  the  only  Saviour  and  light  of  the  world.  This 
was  St.  Peter's  ministry  on  the  day  of  Pentecost. — *'  With 
many  other  words  did  he  testify.''''  (Acts  ii.  40.)  This  was 
the  whole  tenor  of  St.  Paul's  ministry. — ''  He  testified  both 
to  the  Jews  and  Greeks  repentance  towards  God,  and  faith 
towards  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  (Acts  xx.  21.)  Unless 
a  Christian  minister  bears  a  full  testimony  to  Christ,  he  is 
not  faithful  to  his  office.  So  long  as  he  does  testify  of 
Christ,  he  has  done  his  part,  and  will  receive  his  reward, 
although  his  hearers  may  not  believe  his  testimony.  Until 
a  ministers  hearers  believe  on  that  Christ  of  whom  they 
are  told,  they  receive  no  benefit  from  the  ministry.  They 
may  be  pleased  and  interested ;  but  they  are  not  profited 
until  they  believe.     The  great  end  of  a  minister's  testimony 

15  "  that  through  him,  men  may  believe." 

We  see,  secondly,  in  these  verses,  one  principal  position 
which  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  occupies  towards  mankind. 
We  have  it  in  the  words,  "  He  was  the  true  light  which 
lighteth  every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world." 

Christ  is  to  the  souls  of  men  what  the  sun  is  to  the  world. 
He  is  the  centre  and  source  of  all  spiritual  light,  warmth, 
life,  health,  growth,  beauty,  and  fertility.  Like  the  sun. 
He  shines  for  the  common  benefit  of  all  mankind, — for  high 


JOHN,    CHAP.   I.  15 

and  for  low,  for  rich  and  for  poor,  for  Jew  and  for  Greek. 
Like  the  sun,  He  is  free  to  alL  All  may  look  at  Him,  and 
drink  health  out  of  His  hgbt.  If  millions  of  mankind  were 
mad  enough  to  dwell  in  caves  under  ground,  or  to  bandage 
their  eyes,  their  darkness  would  be  their  own  fault,  and 
not  the  fault  of  the  sun.  So,  likewise,  if  millions  of  men 
and  women  love  spiritual "  darkness  rather  than  light,"  the 
blame  must  be  laid  on  their  blind  hearts,  and  not  on  Christ. 
"  Their  foolish  hearts  are  darkened."  (John  iii.  19;  Rom. 
i.  21.)  But  whether  men  will  see  or  not,  Christ  is  the  true 
sun,  and  the  light  of  the  world.  There  is  no  light  for 
sinners  except  in  the  Lord  Jesus. 

"We  see,  thirdly,  in  these  verses,  the  desperate  wickedness 
of  man's  natural  heart.  We  have  it  in  the  words,  Christ 
"  was  in  the  world,  and  the  world  was  made  by  Him,  and 
the  world  knew  Him  not.  He  came  unto  His  own,  and 
His  own  received  Him  not." 

Christ  was  in  the  world  invisibly,  long  before  He  was 
born  of  the  Virgin  Mary.  He  was  there  from  the  very 
beginning,  ruling,  ordering,  and  governing  the  whole  crea- 
tion. By  Him  all  things  consisted.  (Coloss.  i.  17.)  He 
gave  to  all  life  and  breath,  rain  from  heaven,  and  fruitful 
seasons.  By  Him  kings  reigned,  and  nations  were  increased 
or  diminished.  Yet  men  knew  Him  not,  and  honoured 
Him  not.  They  *'  worshipped  and  served  the  creature  more 
than  the  Creator."  (Rom.  i.  25.)  Well  may  the  natural 
heart  be  called  "  wicked  !" 

But  Christ  came  visibly  into  the  world,  when  He  was 
born  at  Bethlehem,  and  fared  no  better.  He  came  to  the  very 
people  whom  He  had  brought  out  from  Egypt,  and  purchased 
for  His  own.  He  came  to  the  Jews,  whom  He  had  separated 
from  other  nations,  and  to  whom  He  had  revealed  Himself 
by  the  prophets.  He  came  to  those  very  Jews  who  had 
read  of  Him  in  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures, — seen  Him 
under  types  and  figures  in  their  temple  services, — and  pro 


16  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

fessed  to  be  waiting  for  His  coming.     And  yet,  when  He 
came,  those  very  Jews   received   Him   not.     They  even 
rejected  Him,  despised  Him,  and  slew  Him.     Well  may 
?  the  natural  heart  be  called  "  desjDcrately  wicked  !" 

We  see,  lastly,  in  these  verses,  the  vast  privileges  of  all 
who  receive  Christ,  and  believe  07i  Sim.  We  are  told  that 
"as  many  as  received  Him,  to  them  gave  He  power  to 
become  the  sons  of  God,  even  to  them  that  believe  on  His 
name." 

Christ  will  never  be  without  some  servants.  If  the  vast 
majority  of  the  Jews  did  not  receive  Him  as  the  Messiah, 
there  were,  at  any  rate,  a  few  who  did.  To  them  He  gave 
the  privilege  of  being  God's  children.  He  adopted  them 
as  members  of  His  Father's  family.  He  reckoned  them 
His  own  brethren  and  sisters,  bone  of  His  bone,  and  flesh  of 
His  flesh.  He  conferred  on  them  a  dignity  which  was  ample 
recompense  for  th-e  cross  which  they  had  to  carry  for  His 
sake.  He  made  them  sons  and  daughters  of  the  Lord 
Almighty. 

Privileges  like  these,  be  it  remembered,  are  the  posses- 
sion of  all,  in  every  age,  who  receive  Christ  by  faith,  and 
follow  Him  as  their  Saviour.  They  are  "  children  of  God 
by  faith  in  Christ  Jesus."  (Gal.  iii.  26.)  They  are  born 
again  by  a  new  and  heavenly  birth,  and  adopted  into  the 
family  of  the  King  of  kings.  Few  in  number,  and  despised 
by  the  world  as  they  are,  they  are  cared  for  with  infinite 
love  by  a  Father  in  heaven,  who,  for  His  Son's  sake,  is 
well  pleased  with  them.  In  time  He  provides  them  with 
everything  that  is  for  their  good.  In  eternity  He  will  give 
them  a  crown  of  glory  that  fadeth  not  away.  These  are 
great  things  !  But  faith  in  Christ  gives  men  an  ample 
title  to  them.  Good  masters  care  for  their  servants,  and 
Christ  cares  for  His. 

Are  we  ourselves  sons  of  God  ?  Have  we  been  born 
again  ?     Have  we  the  marks  which  always  accompany  the 


JOHN,    CHAP.    I.  17 

new  birth, — sense  of  sin,  foith  in  Jesus,  love  of  others, 
righteous  living,  separation  from  the  world  ?  Let  us 
never  be  content  till  we  can  give  a  satisfactory  answer  to 
these  questions. 

Do  we  desire  to  be  sons  of  God  ?  Then  let  us  "  receive 
Christ"  as  our  Saviour,  and  believe  on  Him  with  the 
heart.  To  every  one  that  so  receives  Him,  He  will  give 
the  privilege  of  becoming  a  son  of  God. 

Notes.     John  I.  6 — 13. 

6. — [Ihere  was  a  man  sent  from  God j....  John.]  This  is  a  short  and 
striking  description  of  John  the  Baptist,  He  was  the  messenger 
whom  God  promised  to  send  before  Messiah's  face.  He  was 
born  when  his  parents  were  aged,  by  God's  miraculous  inter- 
position. He  was  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost  from  his  mother's 
womb.  He  received  a  special  commission  from  God  to  preach 
the  baptism  of  repentance,  and  to  proclaim  the  immediate  com- 
ing of  Christ.  In  short,  he  was  specially  raised  up  by  God  to 
prepare  the  way  for  the  Messiah.  For  all  these  reasons  he  is 
here  called  "  a  man  sent  from  God."  It  is,  in  one  sense,  the 
common  mark  of  all  true  ministers  of  "the  Gospel.     Ignorant, 

^  bhnd,  and  unconverted  ministers  may  be  ordained  and  sent  by 
man.     But  they  are  not  "  sent  from  God." 

7. — [  Came  for  a  witness.]  This  does  not  mean,  as  it  might  at  first 
sight  appear,  "  came  to  be  a  witness."  The  Greek  word  which 
we  translate  ''  witness,"  does  not  mean  "  a  person,"  but  the  testi- 
mony which  a  witness  bears. 

[To  hear  witness  of  the  light.]  This  means,  to  testify  concern- 
ing Jesus  Christ  the  hght  of  the  world,  that  He  was  the  promised 
Messiah,  the  Lamb  of  God,  the  Bridegroom,  the  Almighty 
Saviour,  to  whom  all  dark  souls  ought  to  apply. 

[All  men.]  This  cannot  of  course  signify  "  all  mankind."  It 
means  all  who  heard  John's  testimony,  and  all  Jews  who  were 
really  locking  for  a  Redeemer.  One  end  of  John  the  Baptist's 
testimony  was  that  all  such  should  believe  on  Christ  the  true 
light. 

[Through  him.]  This  does  not  mean  "through  Christ"  and 
Christ's  grace,  but  through  John  the  Baptist  and  John's  testi- 
mony. It  is  one  of  those  texts  which  show  the  immense  im- 
portance of  the  ministerial  office.  It  is  a  means  and  instrument 
through  which  the  Holy  Spirit  is  pleased  to  produce  faith  lu 
man's  heart.     "  Faith  cometh  by  hearing."     Through  John  the 


18  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Baptist's  testimony,  Andrew  was  led  to  believe  in  Jesns  and 
become  a  disciple.  Just  so  now,  through  the  preaching  of  minis- 
ters sinners  learn  to  believe  on  Christ  and  are  saved. 

8. — [He  luas  not  that  light]  This  expression  would  be  more  lite- 
rally rendered,  "'  He  was  not  the  light,"  the  promised  light  of 
sinners,  the  hght  of  the  world.  The  Greek  article  "  the,"  is 
used  in  a  similar  emphatic  manner,  to  denote  eminence  and 
distinction,  in  the  following  passages.  "  That  bread."  John  vi. 
32.  "That  prophet."  John  i.  21—25.  "That  day."  1  Thess. 
V.  4.     "  That  way."  Acts  ix.  2. 

Let  it  be  noted  that  our  Lord  himself  calls  John  the  Baptist 
at  a  later  period,  "  The  burning  and  shining  light."  (John  v.  35.) 
But  it  is  a  curious  fact  that  the  Greek  word  there  rendered 
"Ught,"  is  not  the  one  used  here.  It  is  a  word  which  is  fre- 
quently translated  "  candle."  John  the  Baptist  was  a  "  candle," 
but  not  the  light  itself  Believers  are  called  "  the  light  of  the 
world."  (Matt.  v.  14,)  but  only  as  members  of  Christ  the  light, 
and  borrowing  light  from  him.  Christ  alone  is  the  great  sun 
and  fountain  of  aU  light,  the  light  itself 

9. — [That  was  the  true  light.]  The  force  of  the  expression  "  true  " 
in  this  sentence,  is  well  brought  out  by  Arrowsmith  in  his  com- 
mentary on  this  verse.  He  saj- s  that  Christ  is  "  the  true  Kght " 
in  four  respects.  Firstly,  He  is  undeceiving  light,  the  true  light 
in  opposition  to  all  the  false  lights  of  the  Gentiles. — Secondly, 
He  is  real  hght,  true  in  opposition  to  ceremonial  types  and 
shadows. — Thirdly,  He  is  underived  light,  tr.ue  in  opposition  to 
all  light  that  is  borrowed,  communicated,  or  participated  from 
another.— Fourthly,  He  is  supereminent  light,  true  in  opposition 
to  all  that  is  ordinary  and  common. 

[Which  lighteth  every  man. ...cometh... .world.]   This  sentence  haa 
caused   much   difference    of  opinioa    among   commentators,  in 
.  respect  to  two  points. 

(o  )  In  the  first  place,  men  differ  as  to  the  application  of  the 
words,  "that  cometh  into  the  world."  Some  connect  these 
words  with  "  the  true  light,"  and  read  the  words,  "  this  is  the 
true  light  that  coming  into  the  world  lighteth  every  man."  In 
favour  of  this  view,  the  words  "hght  is  come  into  the  world," 
(John  iii.  19,)  and  "  I  am  come  a  light  into  the  world,"  (John 
xii.  46,)  deserve  notice. — Others  connect  the  words  with  "  every 
man,"  and  regard  them  as  a  sweeping  description  of  every  one 
naturally  born  of  the  v^^eed  of  Adam.  That  "coming  into  the 
world "  is  a  Hebiew  phrase  for  being  born,  is  shown  by  Nifa- 
nius.  The  construction  of  the  whole  verse  in  the  original  Greekj 
is  such  that  either  rendering  is  grammatical  and  correct. 

Opinions  are  so  nicely  balanced  on  this  point,  and  so  much 


JOHN,    CHAP.    I.  19 

may  be  said  on  either  side,  that  I  venture  my  own  judgmont 
with  much  hesitiition.  But  I  am  inchned  to  think  on  the  whole, 
with  Chemnitius  and  Grlassius,  that  our  translators  are  right,  and 
that  the  clause  "  that  cometh  into  the  world,"  is  better  con- 
nected with  "  every  man  "  than  with  "  the  true  hght." — If  the 
verse  is  rendered  ''  this  is  the  true  light  that  coming  into  the 
world  lighteth  every  man,"  it  seems  railier  to  narrow  the  bless- 
ing of  the  tiue  light,  and  to  confine  his  illumining  benefits  to  the 
times  after  His  incarnation.  Thi?,  be  it  remembered,  is  precisely 
the  view  of  the  Socinian.  And  yet  it  is  unqne>;tionably  true 
that  Christ's  incarnation  increased  gi-eatly  the  spiritual  light  in 
the  world.  St.  John  says,  "  The  darkness  is  past  and  the  true 
light  now  shineth."  (1  John  ii.  8.)  If,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
verse  is  rendered  as  our  version  has  it,  the  words  "  that  cometh 
into  the  world,"  seem  very  suitably  joined  to  "  every  man,"  as 
expressing  the  universality  of  the  blessings  which  Christ  confers 
on  man.  He  is  not  only  the  true  light  of  the  Jew,  but  of  "  every 
man  that  is  born  into  the  world,"  of  every  name,  and  people, 
and  tongue.  To  suppose,  as  some  have  done,  that  this  applica- 
tion of  the  words  "  come  into  the  world,"  involves  the  preexist- 
ence  of  souls,  is,  to  say  the  least,  a  foolish  thought. 

The  point  is,  happily,  one  on  which  men  may  agree  to  differ. 
Sound  doctrine  may  be  got  out  of  either  view. 

(h.)  The  second  difference  of  opinion  respecting  this  verse 
arises  from  the  words,  "  lighteth  every  man,"  This  expression 
has  received  widely  different  interpretations.  All,  except  here- 
tics, are  agreed  that  the  words  cannot  mean  that  aU  are  con- 
verted, and  cannot  signify  the  final,  universal  salvation  of  all 
mankind.     What  then  do  they  mean? 

Some  think,  as  Cyril,  that  Christ  "  the  true  light,"  lighteth 
every  man  and  woman  on  earth  with  the  light  of  reason,  intelU- 
gence,  and  consciousness  of  right  and  wrong.  This  view  is  par- 
tially true,  and  yet  it  seems  weak  and  defective. 

Some  think,  as  the  Quakers  are  report^^d  to  do,  that  Christ 
lighteth  every  man  and  woman  on  earth  with  an  inward  light  of 
grace,  sufficient  to  save  him,  if  he  will  only  use  it.  This  view 
is  a  dangerous  one,  and  beside  contradicting  many  texts  of 
Scripture,  leads  on  to  downright  Pelagianism. 

Some  think,  as  Augustine,  that  Christ  lighteth  all  that  are 
lighted  by  His  grace,  and  that  ''  every  man  "  is  practically  the 
same  as  every  believer.  They  quote  in  support  of  this  view,  the 
verse,  "The  Lord  upholdeth  aU  that  fall,"  (Psalm  cxlv.  141.) 
where  "  all  "  can  only  mean,  "  all  those  that  are  upheld  are  up- 
held by  the  Lord."  A  favourite  illustration  of  this  view  is  the 
saying,  that  a  schoolmaster  "  teaches  aU  the  boys  in  a  town,** 


20  EXPOSITORY   THOUaHTS. 

that  is,  "  all  who  are  taught  are  taught  by  him."  This  interpre- 
tation, however,  is  not  thoroughly  satisfactory,  and  has  an 
appearance  of  quibbling  and  unfairness  about  it. 

Some  think,  as  Chrysostom,  and  Brentius  in  his  Homilies,  and 
Lightfoot,  that  Christ  is  really  given  to  be  the  light  of  all  man- 
kind. They  think  that  when  it  is  said.  He  "  lighteth  every 
man,"  it  means  that  He  shines  suflficiently  for  the  salvation  of 
all  mankind,  both  Jews  and  G-entiles,  (hke  the  sun  shining  upon 
all  creation,)  though  the  majority  of  men  are  so  blinded  by  sin 
that  they  do  not  see  Him.  Yet  Christ  is  for  every  man.  "  He 
lighteth  all,"  says  Chrysostom,  "  as  far  as  in  Him  lies." — ''  There 
is  power  and  good  will  in  the  light,"  says  Chemnitius,  "  to  illu- 
mine all ;  but  some  love  darkness  rather  than  light."  Arrow- 
smith  says,  "  Christ  doth  dispense  to  every  one  hght  sufficient 
to  leave  him  without  excuse.  But  Christ  doth  not  dispense  to 
every  one  converting  light  sufficient  to  bring  him  to  salvation." 

I  believe  this  last  view  to  be  the  most  probable  one,  though 
I  confess  that  it  is  not  unattended  by  difficulties.  But  I  rest 
in  the  conclusion  that  Clirist  is  offered  as  a  light  to  all  the 
world,  and  that  every  one  born  into  the  world  will  prove  at 
last  to  have  been  in  some  way  indebted  to  Christ,  even  though 
not  saved. 

Pearce  says  of  the  Greek  word  rendered  '"lighteth,"  that,  "in 
the  Hebrew  tongue  that  which  is  only  intended  to  be  done  is 
often  expressed  as  a  thing  actually  done."  He  regards  thia 
expression  before  us  as  a  similar  one.  He  gives,  as  parallel 
instances,  1  Cor.  x.  33,  "please,"  for  "intend  to  please,"  Gal. 
V.  4,  "justified,"  for  "intend  to  be  justified,"  and  1  John  ii.  26, 
"seduce,"  for  "intend  to  seduce," 

The  Greek  word  rendered  "  lighteth  "  is  used  eleven  times  in 
the  New  Testament,  and  is  translated  "  to  give  light,  to  light, 
to  bring  to  light,  to  enlighten,  to  illuminate." 

10. — [He  was  in  the  world,  dr. ...knew  him  not]  This  verse  de- 
scribes the  unbelief  of  the  whole  world  before  Christ's  incarna- 
tion. He  "was  in  the  world  "  invisibly,  before  He  was  born  of 
the  Virgin  Mary,  as  in  the  days  of  Noah.  (1  Pet.  iii.  19.)  Ha 
was  to  be  seen  in  His  works  and  in  His  providential  govern- 
ment of  all  things,  if  men  had  only  had  eyes  to  see  Him.  And 
yet  the  very  world  which  He  had  made,  the  work  of  his  hands, 
did  not  acknowledge,  beheve,  or  obey  Him.  It  knew  Him  not. 
At  Athens,  Paul  found  an  altar  "  to  the  unknown  God." 

That  tlie  expression  applies  to  Christ  before  His  incarnation, 
and  not  after,  is  said  by  Lampe  to  be  the  unanimous  opinion  of 
Origen,  Chrysostom,  Augustine,  Cyril,  Theodoret,  Beda,  Theo- 
phylact,  and  Euthymius. 


21 

There  is  a  striking  similarity  between  the  declaration  of  this 
verse  and  the  contents  of  the  latter  part  of  the  1st  chapter  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Eomans.  In  fact  the  line  of  argument  by 
which  St.  Paul  shows  the  Grentiles  to  be  guilty,  in  the  first 
chapter  of  that  epistle,  and  the  Jews  to  be  equally  guilty  and 
excuseless  in  the  second  chapter,  is  only  a  full  exposition  of 
what  St.  John  here  states  briefly  in  two  verses. 

11.— [^e  cavie  unto  his  own,. ..received  him  not]  This  verse  de- 
scribes the  unbehef  of  the  Jewish  nation  after  the  incarnation 
of  Christ,  and  during  His  ministry  among  them.  He  came  to 
a  people  who  were  peculiarly  His  own,  by  their  redemption 
from  Egypt,  by  their  introduction  into  the  land  of  Canaan,  and 
by  their  possession  of  the  law  of  Moses,  and  the  covenants,  and 
yet  they  did  not  believe  on  Him,  or  receive  Him,  but  actually 
rejected  and  slew  Him. 

There  is  a  peculiarity  about  the  Greek  words  rendered  "  his 
own,"  in  this  verse,  which  ought  not  to  be  overlooked.  The 
first  "  his  own  "  is  in  the  neuter  gender,  and  means  literally  "  his 
own  things."  The  second  '*his  own"  is  in  the  masculine  gen- 
der, and  means  "his  own  men,  servants  or  subjects."  It  is 
probably  meant  to  show  that  our  Lord  came  to  a  people  whose 
land,  territory,  cities,  temple,  were  all  His  own  property,  and 
had  been  originally  granted  by  Himself.  The  Jews,  Palestine, 
Jerusalem,  the  temple,  were  all  Chri'st's  peculiar  possession. 
Israel  was  '^His  inheritance."  (Psalm  Ixxviii.  71.)— This  made 
the  sin  of  those  who  '^  received  Him  not,"  even  more  sinful. 

12. — [As  many  as  received  Jlim.]  This  expression  signifies,  "as 
many  as  believed  on  Christ,  and  acknowledged  Him  as  the 
Messiah."  It  is  only  another  form  of  the  expression  at  the  end 
of  the  verse,  "believed  on  His  name."  To  receive  Christ  is  to 
accept  Him  with  a  willing  heart,  and  to  take  Him  as  our  Saviour. 
It  is  one  of  many  forms  of  speech,  by  which  that  justifying 
faith  which  unites  the  sinner's  soul  to  Christ  is  expressed  in  the 
Bible.  To  believe  on  Christ  with  the  heart,  is  to  receive  Him, 
and  to  receive  Him  is  to  believe  on  Him. — St.  Paul  says  to  the 
Colossians,  "  As  ye  have  received  Christ,  so  walk  ve  in  Him." 
(Col.  ii.  6.) 

The  Greek  word  rendered,  "  As  many  as,"  is  literally,  "who- 
soever," "  whatsoever  persons."  Glassius  remarks,  that  the 
expression  denotes  the  universality  of  the  benefits  which  Christ 
conferred.  "  Whosoever  "  received  Him,  Pharisees,  Saddueees, 
learned  or  unlearned,  male  or  female,  Jews  or  Gentiles,  to  them 
He  gave  the  privilege  of  sonship  to  God. 

[To  them  gave  he  power  to  become  the  sons  of  God.]  This 
expression  means,  "He  gave  them  the  privilege  of  adoption 
into  God's  family."     They  became  the  "  children  of  God    by 


22  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

faith  in  Ohrist  Jesus."  (Gal.  iii,  26.)     "  Whosoever  beHeveth  that 

Jesus  is  the  Christ  is  born  of  God."  (1  John  v.   1.)     There  is 

,  no  sonship  to  God  without  Hving  faith  in  Christ.     Let  this  neyer 

Ibe  forgotten.     To  talk  of  Gcd  being  men's  Father,  and  men 
\  being  God's  children,  while  they  do  not  believe  on  the  Son  of 
vGod,  is  contrary  to  Scripture.     Those  are  not  children  of  God 
who  have  not  faith  in  Jesus. 

The  word  "power"  in  this  sentence  requires  careful  guarding 
against  misrepresentation.  It  means,  as  the  marginal  reading 
says,  "  right  or  privilege."  It  does  not  mean  strength  or  abihty. 
It  does  not  mean  that  Christ  confers  on  those  who  receive  Him 
a  spiritual  and  moral  strength,  by  which  they  convert  them- 
selves, change  their  own  hearts,  and  make  themselves  God's 
children.  No  doubt  Christ  gives  to  all  His  people  all  needful 
grace  to  supply  all  the  wants  of  their  hearts,  and  the  necessities 
of  their  position.  No  doubt  He  gives  them  strength  to  carry 
the  cross,  fight  the  good  fight,  and  overcome  the  world.  But 
that  is  not  the  truth  taught  in  the  words  before  us,  and  must  be 
sought  in  other  places.  The  words  before  us  only  mean  that 
Christ  confers  the  privilege  of  adoption  on  all  believers,  and  did 
80  especially  on  His  first  disciples.  While  their  unbelieving 
fellow-countrymen  were  boasting  of  being  children  of  Abraham, 
Christ  gave  His  disciples  the  far  higher  privilege  of  being 
children  of  God. 

The  Greek  word  rendered  "  power  "  is  used  102  times  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  never  on  one  occasion  in  the  sense  of 
physical,  moral,  or  spiritual  strength  to  do  a  thing.  It  is  gene- 
rally translated,  "  authority,  right,  power,  liberty,  jurisdiction." 

[To  them  that  believe  on  His  name.]  These  words  are  added  to 
make  clearer,  if  possible,  the  character  of  those  who  have  the 
privilege  of  being  sons  of  God.  They  are  they  who  receive 
Christ  and  believe  on  His  name.  Arrowsmith  remarks,  "  The 
word  'name,'  in  the  Scripture,  is  often  put  for  person.  The 
receivers  of  Christ  are  said  to  believe  on  His  name,  because  the 
direct  object  of  their  faith  is  the  person  of  Christ.  It  is  not  the 
believing  that  Christ  died  for  all,  or  for  me,  or  for  the  elect,  or 
any  such  proposition,  that  saveth.  It  is  believing  on  Christ. 
The  person,  or  name  of  Christ,  is  the  object  of  faith." 

The  expression,  "believe  on  His  name,"  ought  not  to  be  over- 
looked. Arrowsmith  remarks  that  there  is  a  known  distinction 
amongst  divines,  between  believing  God,  that  there  is  such  a 
Being, — believing  God,  that  Avhat  He  says  is  true, — and  believ- 
ing on  God  in  the  way  of  faith  and  confidence  as  our  God.  And 
he  observes,  most  truly,  that  precisely  the  same  distinction  exists 
between  faith  that  there  is  such  a  Saviour  as  Christ, — faith  that 
what  Christ  says  is  true, — and  faith  of  reliance  on  Christ  as  our 


JOHN,    CHAP.    I.  23 

Saviour.     ^Believing  on  Christ's  name  is  exactly  this  faith  of 
reliance,  and  is  the  faith  that  saves  and  justifies. 

13, — [  Which  luere  horn,  &c.,  &c....of  Godi\  The  birth  here  spoken 
of  is  the  new  birth,  or  rep-eneration,  that  complete  change  of 
heart  and  nature  which  takes  place  in  a'man  when  he  becomes 
a  real  Christian.  It  is  a  change  so  great  that  no  other  figure 
but  that  of  birth  can  fully  express  it.  It  is  as  when  a  new 
being,  with  new  appetites,  wants,  and  desires  is  brought  into 
the  world.  A  person  born  of  Grod  is  "  a  new  creature,  old  things 
are  passed  away,  behold  all  things  are  become  new."  (2  Cor. 
V.  17.) 

The  persons  who  believe  on  Christ's  name  are  said  to  be  born 
"  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of 
man,  but  of  God."  The  interpretation  of  this  expression  which 
is  usually  given  by  commentators  appears  to  me  neither  correct 
nor  seemly.  The  true  meaning  of  the  words,  I  believe,  is  this. 
BeHevers  did  not  become  what  they  are  "  by  blood,"  that  is  by 
descent  from  Abraham  or  blood  connection  with  godly  people. 
Grace  does  not  descend  from  parent  to  child. — Nor  yet  did 
believers  become  what  they  are  by  the  will  of  the  flesh, — that 
is  by  the  efforts  and  exertions  of  their  own  natural  hearts. 
Nature  can  never  change  itself.  "  That  which  is  born  of  the 
flesh  is  flesh." — Nor  yet  did  believers  become  what  they  are  by 
the  will  of  man, — that  is  by  the  acts  and  deeds  of  others. 
Neither  ordained  ministers,  nor  any  one  else,  can  confer  grace 
upon  another.  Man  cannot  regenerate  hearts. — Believers 
become  v/hat  they  are  solely  and  entirely  by  the  grace  of  God. 
It  is  to  God's  free  grace,  preventing,  calling,  converting,  renew- 
ing and  sanctifying,  that  they  owx  their  new  birth.  They  are 
born  of  God,  or,  as  the  third  chapter  says  more  distinctly, 
"  born  of  the  Spirit." 

The  word  which  w^e  render  "blood,"  in  the  singular  number, 
is,  in  the  Greek,  plural,  "  bloods." — This  peculiarity  has  made 
gome  conjecture  that  the  expression  refers  to  the  blood  shed  in 
circumcision  and  sacrifice,  and  teaches  the  inability  of  these 
things  to  regenerate  man.  But  this  idea  seems  far-fetched  and 
improbable.  The  use  of  the  plural  number  appears  to  me 
intended  to  exclude  aU  fleshly  confidence  in  any  descent  or  rela- 
tionship. It  was  neither  the  blood  of  Abraham,  or  of  David,  or 
of  Aaron,  or  of  Judah,  or  of  Levi,  which  could  give  grace  or 
make  any  one  a  child  of  God. 

This  is  the  first  time  the  new  birth  is  spoken  of  by  name  in 
Scripture.  Let  us  not  fail  to  notice  how  carefully  the  doctrine 
is  fenced  against  errors,  and  how  emphatically  we  are  told  what 
this  new  birth  does  not  come  from,  as  well  as  what  it  does  come 
from.     It  is  a  strikins:  fact  that  when  St.  Peter  mentions  the 


24  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

new  birth,  he  fences  it  in  like  manner,  (I  Pet.  i.  23,)  and 
when  he  speaks  of  baptism  ''  saving  "  us,  he  carefallj  adds  that 
it  is  "not  the  putting  away  the  filtli  of  the  flesh."  (1  Pet.  iii, 
21.)  In  the  face  of  all  these  cautions,  it  is  curious  to  observe 
the  pertinacity  with  which  many  overthrow  the  whole  doctrine 
of  the  new  birth  by  the  assertion  that  all  baptized  persons  are 
born  again ! 

We  must  be  careful  that  we  do  not  interpret  the  words 
"  w^hich  were  born  "  as  if  the  new  birth  was  a  change  which 
takes  place  in  a  man  after  he  has  believed  in  Christ,  and  is  the 
jnext  step  after  faith.  Saving  faith  and  regeneration  are  insepa- 
Irable.  The  moment  that  a  man  really  believes  in  Christ,  how- 
ever feebly,  he  is  born  of  God.  The  weakn»ess  of  his  faith  may 
make  him  unconscious  of  the  change,  just  as  a  new-born  infant 
knows  little  or  nothing  about  itself  But  w^here  there  is  faith 
there  is  always  new  birth,  and  where  there  is  no  faith  there  is 
no  regeneration. 


JOHN  I.  14. 

14  And  the  "Word  was  made  flesh,   gotten  of  the  Father,)  full  of  grace 
and  dwelt  among  us,  (and  we  beheld  and  truth, 
his  glory,  the  glory  as  of  the  only  be- , 

The  passage  of  Scripture  now  before  us  is  very  short,  if 
we  measure  it  by  words.  But  it  is  very  long,  if  we 
measure  it  by  the  nature  of  its  contents.  The  substance 
of  it  is  so  immensely  important  that  we  shall  do  well  to 
give  it  separate  and  distinct  consideration.  This  single 
verse  contains  more  than  enough  matter  for  a  whole 
exposition. 

The  main  truth  which  this  verse  teaches  is  the  reality  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  ChrisVs  incarnation^  or  heing  made  man, 
St.  John  tells  us  that  "  the  "Word  was  made  flesh,  and 
dwelt  among  us." 

The  plain  meaning  of  these  words  is,  that  our  divine 
Saviour  really  took  human  nature  upon  Him,  in  order  to 
save  sinners.  He  really  became  a  man  like  ourselves  in 
all  things,  sin  only  excepted.     Like  ourselves,  he  was  born 


JOHN,    CHAP.    I.  25 

of  a  woman,  though  born  in  a  miraculous  manner.  Like 
ourselves,  He  grew  from  infancy  to  boyhood,  and  from 
boyhood  to  man's  estate,  both  in  wisdom  and  in  stature. 
(Luke  ii.  52.)  Like  ourselves,  he  hungered,  thirsted,  ate, 
drank,  slept,  was  wearied,  felt  pain,  wept,  rejoiced,  mar- 
velled, was  moved  to  anger  and  compassion.  Having  be 
come  flesh,  and  taken  a  body,  He  prayed,  read  the  Scrip- 
tures, suffered  being  tempted,  and  submitted  His  human 
will  to  the  will  of  God  the  Father.  And  finally,  in  the 
same  body.  He  really  suffered  and  shed  His  blood,  really 
died,  was  really  buried,  really  rose  again,  and  really 
ascended  up  into  heaven.  And  yet  all  this  time  He  was 
God  as  well  as  man  ! 

This  union  of  two  natures  in  Christ's  one  Person  is 
doubtless  one  of  the  greatest  mysteries  of  the  Christian 
religion.  It  needs  to  be  carefully  stated.  It  is  just  one 
of  those  great  truths  which  are  not  meant  to  be  curiously 
pried  into,  but  to  be  reverently  believed.  Nowhere,  per- 
haps, shall  Ave  find  a  more  wise  and  judicious  statement 
than  in  the  second  article  of  the  Church  of  England. 
"  The  Son,  which  is  the  "Word  of  the  Father,  begotten 
from  everlasting  of  the  Father,  the  very  and  eternal  God, 
and  of  one  substance  with  the  Father,  took  man's  nature 
in  the  womb  of  the  blessed  Virgin  of  her  substance  :  so 
that  two  whole  and  perfect  natures,  that  is  to  say,  the  God- 
head and  the  manhood,  were  joined  together  in  one  Per- 
son, never  to  be  divided,  whereof  is  one  Christ,  very  God 
and  very  man."  This  is  a  most  valuable  declaration.  This 
is  "  sound  speech,  which  cannot  be  condemned." 

But  while  we  do  not  pretend  to  explain  the  union  of  two 
natures  in  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ's  Person,  we  must  not 
hesitate  to  fence  the  subject  with  well-defined  cautions. 
While  we  state  most  carefully  what  we  do  believe,  we  must 
not  shrink  from  declaring  boldly  what  we  do  not  believe. 
We  must  never  forget,  that  though  our  Lord  was  God  and 

2 


26  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

man  at  the  same  time,  the  divine  and  human  natures  in 
Him  were  never  confounded.  One  nature  did  not  swallow 
up  the  other.  The  two  natures  remained  perfect  and  dis- 
tinct. The  divinity  of  Cln-ist  was  never  for  a  moment  laid 
aside,  although  veiled.  The  manhood  of  Christ,  during 
His  life-time,  was  never  for  a  moment  unlike  our  own, 
though  by  union  with  the  Godhead,  greatly  dignified. 
Though  perfect  God,  Christ  has  always  been  perfect  man 
from  the  first  moment  of  His  incarnation.  He  that  is  gone 
into  heaven,  and  is  sitting  at  the  Father's  right  hand  to 
intercede  for  sinners,  is  man  as  well  as  God.  Though  per- 
fect man,  Christ  never  ceased  to  be  perfect  God.  He  that 
suflfered  for  sin  on  the  cross,  and  was  made  sin  for  us,  was 
"  God  manifest  in  the  flesh."  The  blood  with  which  the 
Church  was  purchased,  is  called  the  blood  "  of  God." 
(Acts  XX.  28.)  Though  He  became  "flesh"  in  the  fullest 
sense,  when  He  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  He  never  at 
any  period  cea,sed  to  be  the  Eternal  Word.  To  say  that 
He  constantly  manifested  His  divine  nature  during  His 
earthly  ministry,  would,  of  course,  be  contrary  to  plain 
facts.  To  attempt  to  explain  why  His  Godhead  was  some- 
times veiled  and  at  other  times  unveiled,  while  He  was  on 
earth,  would  be  venturing  on  ground  which  we  had  better 
leave  alone.  But  to  say  that  at  any  instant  of  His  earthly 
ministry  He  was  not  fully  and  entirely  God,  is  nothing  less 
than  heresy. 

The  cautions  just  given  may  seem  at  first  sight  needless, 
wearisome,  and  hair-spHtting.  It  is  precisely  the  neglect 
of  such  cautions  which  ruins  many  souls.  This  constant 
undivided  union  of  two  perfect  natures  in  Christ's  Person 
is  exactly  that  which  gives  infinite  value  to  His  mediation, 
and  qualifies  Him  to  be  the  very  Mediator  that  sinners 
need.  Our  Mediator  is  One  who  can  sympathize  with  us, 
because  He  is  very  man.  And  yet,  at  the  same  time.  He 
is  One  who  can  deal  with  the  Father  for  us  on  equal  terms, 


27 

because  He  is  very  God. — It  is  the  same  union  which  gives 
infinite  value  to  His  righteousness,  when  imputed  to  be- 
lievers. It  is  the  righteousness  of  One  who  was  God  as 
well,  as  man. — It  is  the  same  union  which  gives  infinite 
value  to  the  atoning  blood  which  He  shed  for  sinners  on 
the  cross.  It  is  the  blood  of  One  who  was  God  as  well  as 
man. — It  is  the  same  union  which  gives  infinite  value  to 
His  resurrection.  When  He  rose  again,  as  the  Head  of  the 
body  of  believers,  He  rose  not  as  a  mere  man,  but  as  God. 
— Let  these  things  sink  deeply  into  our  hearts.  The  second 
Adam  is  far  greater  than  the  first  Adam  was.  The  first 
Adam  was  only  man,  and  so  he  fell.  The  second  Adam 
was  God  as  well  as  man,  and  so  He  completely  con- 
quered. 

Let  us  leave  the  subject  with  feelings  of  deep  gratitude 
and  thankfulness.  It  is  full  of  abounding  consolation  for 
all  who  know  Christ  by  faith,  and  believe  on  Him. 

Did  the  Word  become  flesh  ?  Then  He  is  One  who  can 
be  touched  with  the  feeling  of  His  people's  infirmities, 
because  He  has  suffered  Himself,  being  tempted.  He  is 
almighty  because  He  is  God,  and  yet  He  can  feel  with  us, 
because  He  is  man. 

Did  the  Word  become  flesh  ?  Then  He  can  supply  us 
with  a  perfect  pattern  and  example  for  our  daily  life. 
Had  he  walked  among  us  as  an  angel  or  a  spirit,  we 
could  never  have  copied  Him.  But  having  dwelt  among 
us  as  a  man,  we  know  that  the  true  standard  of  holiness  is 
to  "  walk  even  as  He  walked."  (1  John  ii.  6.)  He  is  a 
perfect  pattern,  because  He  is  God.  But  He  is  also  a  pat- 
tern exactly  suited  to  our  wants,  because  He  is  man. 

Finally,  did  the  Word  become  flesh  ?  Then  let  us  see 
in  our  mortal  bodies  a  real,  true  dignity,  and  not  defile 
them  by  sin.  Vile  and  weak  as  our  body  may  seem,  it  is  a 
body  which  the  Eternal  Son  of  God  was  not  ashamed  to 
take  upon  Himself,  and  to  take  up  to  heaven.     That  simple 


28  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

fact  is  a  pledge  that  He  will  raise  our  bodies  at  the  last 
day,  and  glorify  them  together  with  His  own. 

Notes.     John  I.  14. 

[And  the  ivord  was  made  flesh.]  This  sentence  means  that  the 
eternal  Word  of  God,  the  second  Person  in  the  Trinity,  became 
a  man,  like  one  of  ourselves  in  all  things,  sin  only  excepted 
This  He  accomphshed,  by  being  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  after 
a  miraculous  manner,  through  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Grhost 
And  tlie  end  for  which  He  became  flesh,  was  that  He  might 
live  and  die  for  sinners. 

The  expression  "  the  "Word,"  shows  clearly  that  "  the  Word  " 
who  "  was  with  God  and  was  God,"  must  be  a  Person.  It  could 
not  reasonably  be  said  of  any  one  but  a  Person,  that  He  became 
"  flesh  and  dwelt  among  us."  Whether  St.  John  could  have 
found  any  other  name  for  the  second  Person  of  the  Trinity 
equally  proper,  we  need  not  trouble  ourselves  to  inquire.  It 
certainly  would  not  have  been  accurately  correct  to  say  that 
"  Jesus  was  made  flesh,"  because  the  name  Jesus  was  not  given 
to  our  lord  till  after  His  incarnation.  Nor  yet  would  it  have 
been  correct  to  say,  "  In  the  beginning  was  Christ,"  because  the 
name  Christ  belongs  to  the  times  after  the  fall  of  man. 

This  is  the  last  time  that  John  uses  this  expression,  "  The 
Word,"  about  Christ  in  his  Gospel.  From  the  time  of  His  incar- 
nation he  generally  speaks  of  Him  as  "  Jesus,"  or  "  the  Lord." 

[  Was  inade.]  This  expression  might  perhaps  have  been  better 
translated  "  became."  .  At  any  rate,  we  must  carefully  remember 
that  it  does  not  signify  "  was  created."  Tlie  Athanasian  Creed 
pays  truly,  "  The  Son  is  of  the  Father  alone,  neither  made  nor 
created,  but  begotten." 

[Flesh.]  The  use  of  this  word,  instead  of  "  man,"  ought  not 
to  be  overlooked.  It  is  purposely  used  in  order  to  show  us  that 
when  our  Lord  became  incarnate,  He  took  upon  Him  nothing 
less  than  our  whole  nature,  consisting  of  a  true  body  and  a 
reasonable  soul.  As  Arrowsmith  says,  "  That  which  was  not 
taken  could  not  be  healed.  If  Christ  had  not  taken  the  whole 
man.  He  could  not  have  saved  the  sou\"— It  also  implies  that 
our  Lord  took  upon  Him  a  body  liable  to  those  weaknesses, 
fatigues,  and  pains,  which  are  inseparable  from  the  idea  of  tlesh. 
He' did  not  become  a  man  like  Adam  before  the  fd',  with  a 
nature  free  from  all  infirmity.  He  became  a  man  like  any  one 
of  Adam's  children,  with  a  nature  hahle  to  every  thing  that  f  dlen 
humanity  is  Hable  to,  except  sin.  He  was  made  "  flesh,"  and  ''  all 
flesh  is  gra^b."— Finally,  it  teaches  that  our  Lord  did  not  assume 


JOHN,    CHAP.   I.  29 

the  finman  nature  of  any  one  family,  or  class,  or  people,  but 
that  nature  which  is  common  to  all  Adam's  children,  whether 
Jews  or  G-entiles.  Ke  came  to  be  a  Saviour  for  "  all  flesh,"  and 
so  was  made  "  flesh." 

The  subject  of  this  sentence  is  a  deeply  mysterious  one,  but 
one  about  which  it  is  most  important  to  have  clear  views.  Next 
to  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  there  is  no  doctrine  on  whif  h 
fallen  man  has  built  so  many  deadly  heresies  as  the  incarnation 
of  Christ.  There  is  unquestionably  much  about  this  union  of 
two  natures  in  one  person  which  we  cannot  explain,  and  must 
be  content  to  beheve.  There  is  much  that  we  cannot  under- 
stand, be  it  remembered,  in  the  union  of  body  and  soul  in  our 
own  persons.  But  there  are  some  points  in  the  subject  of 
Christ's  incarnation  which  we  must  hold  fast,  and  never  let  go. 

(a.)  In  the  first  place,  let  us  carefully  remember,  that  when 
"  the  Word  became  flesh,"  He  became  so  by  the  union  of  two 
perfect  and  distinct  natures  in  one  Person.  The  manner  of  this 
union  we  cannot  explain,  but  the  fact  we  must  firmly  believe. 
"  Christ,"  says  the  Athnnasian  Creed,  "  is  God  and  Man  ;  God  of 
the  substance  of  the  Father,  begotten  before  the  world,  and  man 
of  the  substance  of  His  mofhei',  born  in  the  world  ;  perfect  God 
and  perfect  man.  Who,  although  He  be  God  and  man,  yet  He 
is  not  two  but  one  Christ;  one  not  by  conversion  of  the  godhead 
into  flesh,  but  by  taking  of  the  manhood  into  God."  These 
words  are  very  important.  The  Word  was  not  made  flesh  by 
changing  one  nature  into  another,  or  by  laying  aside  one  nature 
and  taking  up  another.  In  all  our  thoughts  about  Christ,  ht  us 
take  care  that  we  do  not  divide  His  Person,  and  that  we  maintain 
steadily  that  He  has  two  distinct  and  perfect  natures.  The  old 
Latin  line  on  the  subject,  quoted  by  Gomarus,  is  worth  remem- 
bering. It  represents  "the  Word  made  flesh,"  as  saying,  "I  am 
what  I  was,  that  is  God : — I  was  not  what  I  am,  that  is  man  : — 
I  am  now  called  both,  that  is  both  God  and  man." 

(&.)  Secondly,  when  "  the  Word  became  flesh,"  He  did  not  cease 
for  a  moment  to  be  God.  No  doubt  He  was  pleased  to  veil  His 
divinity  and  to  hide  His  power,  and  more  especially  so  at  some 
seasons.  He  emptied  Himself  of  external  marks  of  glory  and 
was  called  "  the  carpenter."  But  He  never  laid  His  divinity 
aside.  God  cannot  cease  to  be  God.  It  was  as  God-man  that 
He  lived,  suffered,  died,  and  rose  again.  It  is  writ  :en  that  God 
''  has  purchased  the  Church  with  His  own  blood.''  It  was  the 
blood  of  one  who  was  not  man  only,  but  God. 

(c.)  Thirdly,  when  "  the  Word  became  flesh,"  He  was  made 
a  man  in  the  truth  of  our  nature  like  unto  us  in  all  things,  ana 
fiom  that  hcur  has  never  ceased  to  be  man.  His  humanity  was 
not  a  humanity  different  from  our  own,  and  though  now  glorified 


so  EXPOSITOKY  THOUGHTS. 

is  our  humanity  still.  It  was  perfect  man  no  less  than  pprfect 
God,  who  resisted  temptation,  fulfilled  the  law  perfectly,  endured 
the  contradiction  of  smners,  spent  nig-hts  in  prayer,  kept  His  will 
in  subjecLion  to  the  Father's  will,  suffered,  died,  and  at  length 
ascended  up  to  heaven  with  flesh,  bones,  and  all  things  apper- 
taining to  man's  nature.  It  is  written,  that  in  "all  things  it  be- 
hoved Him  to  be  made  like  unto  His  brethren."  Moreover,  He 
did  not  lay  aside  His  humanity  when  He  left  the  world.  He 
that  ascended  np  on  the  mount  Olives,  and  is  sitting  at  the  right 
hand  of  God  to  intercede  for  believers,  is  one  who  is  still  man  as 
well  as  God.  Our  High  Priest  in  heaven  is  not  God  only,  but 
man.  Christ's  humanity  as  well  as  divinity  are  both  in  heaven. 
One  in  our  nature,  our  elder  Brother,  has  gone  as  our  Fore- 
runner to  prepare  a  place  for  us. 

{d.)  Lastly,  When  "the  Word  became  flesh,"  He  did  not 
take  on  Him  "  peccable  flesh."  It  is  written  that  He  was  made 
in  "  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh."  (Rom.  viii.  3.)  But  we  must 
not  go  beyond  this.  Christ  was  "  made  sin  fur  us."  (2  Cor.  5, 
21.)  But  He  "  knew  no  sin,"  and  was  holy,  harmless,  undefiled, 
separate  from  sinners,  and  without  taint  of  corruption.  Satan 
found  nothing  in  Him.  Christ's  human  nature  was  liable  to 
weakness,  but  not  to  sin.  The  words  of  the  fifteenth  Article 
must  never  be  forgotten,  Christ  was  "  void  from  sin,  both  in  His 
flesh  and  in  His  Spirit." 

For  want  of  a  clear  understanding  of  this  union  of  two  natures 
in  Christ's  Person,  the  heresies  which  arose  in  the  eaily  Church 
weie  many  and  great.  And  3^et  Arrowsmith  points  out  that  no 
less  than  lour  of  these  heresies  are  at  once  confuted  by  a  right 
interpretation  of  the  sentence  now  before  us. 

*'  The  Arians  hold  that  Jesus  Christ  was  not  true  God.  This 
text  calleth  Him  the  Word,  and  maketh  Him  a  Person  in  the 
Trinity. 

"  The  Apollinarians  acknowledge  Christ  to  be  God,  yea,  and 
man  too ;  but  they  hold  that  He  took  only  the  body  of  a  man, 
not  the  soul  of  a  man,  while  His  divinity  supplied  the  room  of 
a  soul.  We  interpret  the  word  '  flesh '  for  the  whole  human 
nature,  both  soul  and  body. 

"  The  Nestorians  grant  Christ  to  be  both  God  and  man  :  bu^ 
then  they  say  the  Godhead  made  one  person,  and  the  manhood 
another  person.  We  interpret  the  woi-ds  '  was  made'  as  imply- 
ing an  union,  in  which  Christ  assumed  not  the  person  of  man, 
but  the  nature  of  man. 

"The  Eutychians  held  but  one  person  in  Christ;  but  then 
they  confounded  the  natures.  They  say  the  Godhead  and  man- 
hood made  such  a  mixture  as  to  produce  a  third  tiling.     Here 


JOHN,    CHAP.    I.  31 

Miey  also  are  confuted  by  the  right  understand!  jg  of  the  union 
between  the  Word  and  flesh." 

He  then  goes  on  to  show  how  the  ancient  Church  met  all 
these  heretics  with  four  adverbs,  which  briefly  and  conveniently 
defined  the  union  of  two  natures  in  Christ's  person.  They  said 
that  the  divine  and  human  natures  when  "  the  Word  was  made 
flesh,"  were  united  truly^  to  oppose  the  Arians, — perfectly,  to 
oppose  the  ApoUinarians, — undividedly,  to  oppose  the  Nestorians, 
— and   unmixedly^  to  oppose  the  Eatychians. 

Those  who  wish  to  examine  this  subject  further,  will  do  well 
to  consult  Pearson  on  the  Creed,  Dods  on  the  Incarnation  of  the 
Eternal  Word,  and  Hooker's  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  B.  v.,  chap, 
51,  52,  53,  54. 

[Dwelt  among  us.']  The  Greek  word  rendered  dwelt,  means 
literally  "  tabernacled,"  or  "  dwelt  in  a  tent."  The  sentence  does 
not  mean  that  Christ  dwelt  in  His  human  body  as  in  a  tabernacle, 
which  He  left  when  He  ascended  up  to  heaven.  "  Christ,"  says 
Arrowsmith,  "continueth  now,  and  shall  for  ever,  as  trae  man 
as  when  He  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary. — He  so  took  human 
nature  as  never  to  lay  it  down  again."  The  sentence  only  means 
that  Christ  dwelt  among  men  on  earth  for  thirty-three  years. 
He  was  on  earth  so  long  conversing  among  men,  that  there 
could  be  no  doubt  of  the  reality  of  His  incarnation.  He  did 
not  appear  for  a  few  minutes,  like  a  phantom  or  ghost.  He  did 
not  come  down  for  a  brief  visit  of  a  few  days,  but  was  living 
among  us  in  His  human  body  for  the  duration  of  a  whole  gene- 
ration of  men.  For  thirty-three  years  He  pitched  His  tent  in 
Palestine,  and  was  going  to  and  fro  among  its  inhabitants. 

Arrowsmit^  remarks  that  three  sorts  of  men  are  described  in 
the  Bible  as  living  in  tents ;  shepherds,  sojourners,  and  soldiers. 
He  thinks  that  the  phrase  here  used  has  reference  to  the  calling 
of  all  these  three,  and  that  it  points  to  Christ's  life  on  earth 
being  that  of  a  shepherd,  a  traveller,  and  a  soldier.  But  it  may 
be  doubted  whether  this  is  not  a  somewhat  fanciful  idea,  how- 
ever pleasing  and  true.  The  Greek  word  rendered  "  dwelt "  is  only 
used  in  four  other  places  in  the  New  Testament,  (Rev.  vii.  15 ; 
xii.  12 ;  xiii.  6  ;  xxi.  3,)  and  in  each  of  them  is  applied  to  a 
permanent,  and  not  a  temporary  dwelling. 

[  Wt  beheld  his  glory.]  St.  John  here  declares,  that  although 
*Hhe  Word  was  made  flesh,"  he  and  others  beheld  from  time 
to  time  His  glory,  and  saw  manifest  proof  that  He  was  not 
man  only,  but  the  "  only  begotten  Son  of  God." 

There  is  a  difference  of  opinion  among  commentators  as  to  the 
right  application  of  these  words.  Some  think  that  they  apply 
to  Christ's  aacension,  which  John  witnessed,  and  to  all  His  mi^ 


32  EXPOSITOKY  THOUGHTS. 

raculous  actions  tbrougliout  His  ministry,  in  all  of  which,  as  it 
is  said  of  the  miracle  of  Cana,  He  "  maniftsted  forth  his  glory," 
and  His  disciples  saw  it. — Others  think  tliat  they  aj^iply  especially 
to  our  Lord's  transfiguration,  when  He  put  on  for  a  little  season 
His  glory,  in  the  presence  of  John,  James,  and  Peter.  I  am  on 
the  whole  mclined  to  think  that  this  is  the  true  view,  and  the 
more  so,  because  of  Peter's  words  in  speaking  of  the  transfigura- 
tion, (2  Pet.  i.  16,  18,)  and  the  words  which  immediately  follow 
in  the  verse  we  are  now  considering. 

[The  glory  as  of  the  only  begotten  of  the  Father.]  This  sen- 
tence means  "  such  glory  as  became  and  was  suitable  to  one  who 
is  the  only  begotten  Son  of  Grod  the  Father."  These  words  will 
hardly  apply  to  Christ's  miracles.  They  seem  to  confine  the  glory 
which  John  says  "  we  beheld,"  to  the  vision  of  glory  which  he 
and  his  two  companions  saw  when  Christ  was  transfigured,  and 
they  heard  the  Father  saying,  "  This  is  my  beloved  Son." 

Lightfoot's  paraphrase  of  this  expression  is  w^orth  reading 
though  he  does  not  apply  the  passage  to  the  transfiguration 
"  We  saw  His  glory  as  what  was  worthy,  as  became,  the  only  be- 
gotten Son  of  God.  He  did  not  glisten  in  any  worldly  pomp  or 
grandeur,  according  to  what  the  Jewish  nation  fondly  dreamed 
their  Messiah  would  do.  But  He  was  dressed  with  the  glory  of 
holiness,  grace,  truth,  and  the  power  of  miracles." 

We  must  carefully  remember  that  the  adverb  "  as  "  in  this 
place,  does  not  imply  comparison,  or  similitude,  as  if  John  only 
meant  that  the  Word's  glory  was  like  that  of  the  only  begotten 
Son  of  God.  Chrysostom  says,  "  The  expression  '  as '  in  this 
place  does  not  belong  to  similarity  or  comparison,  but  to  con- 
firmation and  unquestionable  definition,  as  though  he  said,  we 
beheld  glory  such  as  it  was  becoming  and  likely  that  He  should 
possess,  who  is  the  only  begotten  and  true  Son  of  God  and  King 
of  all."  He  also  remarks  that  it  is  a  common  manner  of  speak- 
ing, when  people  are  describing  the  appearance  of  a  king  in 
state,  to  say  that  "  he  was  like  a  king,"  meaning  only  that  he 
was  a  real  king. 

Glassius,  in  his  Philologia,  makes  the  saT,e  comment  on  the 
expression,  and  quotes  as  parallel  cases  of  the  use  of  ths  adverb 
''as,"  2  Pet.  j.  3;  1  Pet.  i.  19;  Philem.  9;  Rom.  ix.  32;  Matt, 
xiv.  5;  2  Coi.  iii.  18.  He  thinks  it  a  Hebraism,  denoting  not 
the  similitude,  but  the  reality  and  truth  of  a  thing,  and  quotes 
Psalm  cxxii.  3,  and  Hosea  iv.  4,  as  Old  Testament  instances. 

[The  only  degoften  of  the  Father.]  This  remarkable  expression 
describes  our  Lord's  eternal  generation,  or  Sonship.  He  is  that 
Person  who  alone  has  been  begotten  of  the  Father  from  all 
eternity,  and  from  all  eternity  has  been  His  beloved  Son. 


JOHN-,    CHAP.    I.  83 

The  phrase  is  only  used  five  times  in  the  New  Testament,  and 
only  in  St.  John's  writing's.  That  God  always  had  a  Son  appears 
in  the  Old  Testament.  "  What  is  his  son's  name,"  says  Agar. 
(Prov.  XXX,  4.)  So  also  the  Father  says  to  Mes-iah,  "  rhou  art 
my  Son :  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee."  (Psal.  ii.  7.)  But  the 
Sonship  now  before  us,  we  must  carefully  remember,  is  not  to 
be  dated  from  any  "  day."  It  is  the  everlasting  Sonship  of 
which  John  speaks. 

The  subject  is  one  of  those  which  we  must  be  content  to 
believe  and  reverence,  but  must  not  attempt  to  define  too  nar- 
rowly. We  are  taught  distinctly  in  Scripture  that  in  the  unity 
of  the  Godhead,  there  are  three  Persons  of  one  substance,  power, 
and  eternity,  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost.  We 
are  taught,  with  equal  distinctness,  that  *'  Sonship  "  describes 
the  everlasting  relation  which  exists  between  the  first  and 
second  Persons  in  the  Trinity,  and  that  Christ  is  the  only  begot- 
ten and  eternal  Son  of  God.  We  are  taught,  vvdth  equal  dis- 
tinctness, that  the  Father  loveth  the  Son,  and  loved  Him  before 
the  foundation  of  the  world.  (John  xvii.  24.)  But  here  we  must 
be  content  to  pause.  Our  feeble  faculties  could  not  comprehend 
more  if  more  were  told  us. 

Let  us  however  remember  carefully,  when  we  think  of  Christ 
as  the  only  begotten  Son  of  the  Father,  that  we  must  not  attach 
the  least  idea  of  inferiority  to  the  idea  of  His  Sonship.  As  the 
Athanasian  creed  says,  "  The  Godhead  of  the  Father,  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  all  one,  the  glory  equal,  the  majesty 
co-eternal.  Such  as  the  Father  is,  such  is  the  Son."  And  yet 
the  Father  is  not  the  Son,  and  the  Son  is  not  the  Father.  The 
argument  of  the  ancient  Arians,  that  if  Christ  is  the  Son  of 
God,  he  must  necessarily  be  inferior  in  dignity  to  God,  and 
subsequent  in  existence  to  God,  is  one  that  will  not  stand  for  a 
moment.  The  reply  is  simple.  We  are  not  talking  of  the  rela- 
tionship of  mortal  beings,  but  of  the  relationship  between  the 
Persons  of  the  Trinity,  who  are  eternal.  All  analogies  and  illus- 
trations drawn  from  human  parents  and  children  are  necessarily 
defective.  As  Augustine  said,  so  must  we  say,  "  Show  me  and 
explain  to  me  an  eternal  Father,  and  I  will  show  you  and  explain 
to  you  an  eternal  Son."  We  must  believe  and  not  try  to 
explain.  Christ's  generation,  as  God,  is  eternal, — who  shall 
declare  it?  He  was  begotten  from  everlasting  of  the  Father. 
He  was  always  the  beloved  Son.  And  yet  "  He  is  equal  to  the 
Father  as  touching  his  godhead,  though  inferior  to  Him  as  touch- 
ing his  manhood." 

[Full  of  Grace  and  Truth.]  These  words  do  not  belong  to 
the  Father,  though  they  follow  His  name  so  closely.  They 
belong  to  "  the  Word."  The  meaning  of  them  is  differently 
explained. 

2* 


84 


EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 


Some  tliink  that  they  describe  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ's  cha- 
r«icter,  during  the  time  that  He  was  upon  the  earth,  in  general 
terms.  Full  of  grace  were  His  lips,  and  full  of  grace  was  His 
life.  He  was  full  of  the  grace  of  G-od,  the  Spirit  dwelling  in 
Him  without  measure,  full  of  kindness,  love,  and  favour  to  man  ; 
— full  of  truth  in  His  deeds  and  words,  for  in  His  hps  was  no 
guile,  full  of  truth  in  His  preaching  concerning  God  the  Father's 
love  to  sinners,  and  the  way  of  salvation,  for  He  was  ever 
unfolding  in  rich  abundance  all  truths  that  man  can  need  to 
know  for  his  soul's  good. 

Some  think  that  the  words  describe  especially  the  spiritual 
riches  that  Christ  brought  into  the  world,  when  He  became 
incarnate,  and  set  up  His  kingdom.  He  came  full  of  the  gospel 
of  grace,  in  contradistinction  to  the  burdensome  requirements  of 
the  ceremonial  law.  He  came  full  of  truth,  of  real,  true,  solid 
comfort,  in  contradistinction  to  the  types,  and  figures,  and 
shadows  of  the  law  of  Moses.  In  short  the  full  grace  of  God, 
and  the  full  truth  about  the  way  of  acceptance,  were  never 
clearly  seen  until  the  Word  became  flesh,  dwelt  among  us  on 
earth,  opened  the  treasure-house,  and  revealed  grace  and  truth 
in  His  own  person. 

I  decidedly  prefer  the  second  of  these  two  views.  The  first 
is  truth,  but  not  the  truth  of  the  passage.  The  second  appears 
to  me  to  harmonize  with  the  17th  verse,  which  follows  almost 
immediately,  where  the  law  and  the  gospel  are  contrasted,  und 
we  are  told  that  "  grace  and  truth  came  by  Jesus  Christ." 


JOHN  I.  15—18. 


15  John  bare  witness  of  him,  and 
cried,  saying,  This  was  he  of  whom 
I  spake,  He  that  cometh  after  me 
is  preferred  before  me :  for  he  was 
before  me. 

16  And  of  his  fulness  have  aU 
we  received,  and  grace  for  grace. 


1*1  For  the  law  was  given  by 
Moses,  but  grace  and  truth  came 
by  Jesus  Christ. 

18  No  man  hath  seen  God  at 
any  time ;  the  only  beo;otten  Son, 
which  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father, 
he  hath  declared  him. 


The  passage  before  us  contains  three  great  declarations 
about  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Each  of  the  three  is 
among  the  foundation  principles  of  Christianity. 

We  are  taught,  firstly,  that  it  is  Christ  alone  who  sup- 
plies all  the  spiritual  wants  of  all  believers,     ft  is  written 


JOHN,    CHAP.    I.  35 

that  "  of  his  fulness  have  we  all  received,  and  grace  ioi 
grace." 

There  is  an  infinite  fulness  in  Jesus  Christ.  As  St.  Paul 
says,  *'  It  pleased  the  Father  that  in  him  should  all  fulness 
dwell." — "  In  Him  are  hid  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and 
knowledge."  (Coloss.  i.  19;  ii.  3.)  There  is  laid  up  in 
Him,  as  in  a  treasury,  a  boundless  supply  of  all  that  any 
sinner  can  need,  either  in  time  or  eternity.  The  Spirit  of 
Life  is  His  special  gift  to  the  Church,  and  conveys  from 
Him,  as  from  a  great  root,  sap  and  vigour  to  all  the  believ- 
ing branches.  He  is  rich  in  mercy,  grace,  wisdom,  right- 
eousness, sanctification,  and  redemption.  Out  of  Christ's 
fulness,  all  believers  in  every  age  of  the  world,  have  been 
supplied.  They  did  not  clearly  understand  the  fountain 
from  which  their  supplies  flowed,  in  Old  Testament  times. 
The  Old  Testament  saints  only  saw  Christ  afar  off,  and  not 
face  to  face.  But  from  Abel  downwards,  all  saved  souls 
have  received  all  they  have  had  from  Jesus  Christ  alone. 
Every  saint  in  glory  will  at  last  acknowledge  that  he  is 
Christ's  debtor  for  all  he  is.  Jesus  will  prove  to  have  been 
all  in  all. 

We  are  taught,  secondly,  the  vast  superiority  of  Christ 
to  Moses,  and  of  the  Gospel  to  the  Law.  It  is  written  that 
*'  the  law  was  given  by  Moses,  but  grace  and  truth  came 
by  Jesus  Christ." 

Moses  was  employed  by  God  "  as  a  servant,"  to  convey 
to  Israel  the  moral  and  ceremonial  law.  (Heb.  iii.  5.)  As 
a  servant,  he  was  faithful  to  Him  who  appointed  him,  but 
he  was  only  a  servant.  The  moral  law,  which  he  brought 
down  from  Mount  Sinai,  was  holy,  and  just,  and  good. 
But  it  could  not  justify.  It  had  no  healing  power.  It 
could  wound,  but  it  could  not  bind  up.  It  "  worked  wrath." 
(Rom.  iv.  15.)  It  pronounced  a  curse  against  any  imperfect 
obedience. — The  ceremonial  law,  which  he  was  commanded 
to  impose  on  Israel,  was  full  of  deep  meaning  and  typical 


6b  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

instruction.  Its  ordinances  and  ceremonies  made  it  an 
excellent  schoolmaster  to  guide  men  toward  Christ.  (Gal. 
iii.  24.)  But  the  ceremonial  law  was  only  a  schoolmaster. 
It  could  not  make  him  that  kept  it  perfect,  as  pertaining 
to  the  conscience.  (Heb.  ix.  9.)  It  laid  a  grievous  yoke 
on  men's  hearts,  which  they  were  not  able  to  bear.  It  was 
a  rninistration  of  death  and  condemnation.  (2  Cor.  iii. 
7 — 9.)  The  light  which  men  got  from  Moses  and  the  law 
was  at  best  only  starlight  compared  to  noon-day. 

Christ,  on  the  other  hand,  came  into  the  world  "  as  a 
Son,"  with  the  keys  of  God's  treasury  of  grace  and  truth 
entirely  in  His  hands.  (Heb.  iii.  6.)  Grace  came  by  Him, 
when  He  made  fully  known  God's  gracious  plan  of  salva- 
tion, by  faith  in  His  own  blood,  and  opened  the  fountain 
of  mercy  to  all  the  world. — Truth  came  by  Him,  when  He 
fulfilled  in  His  own  Person  the  types  of  the  Old  Testament, 
and  revealed  Himself  as  the  true  Sacrifice,  the  true  mercy- 
seat,  and  the  true  Priest.  N'o  doubt  there  was  much  of 
"  grace  and  truth  "  under  the  law  of  Moses.  But  the 
whole  of  God's  grace,  and  the  whole  truth  about  redemp- 
tion, were  never  known  until  Jesus  came  into  the  world, 
and  died  for  sinners. 

We  are  taught,  thirdly,  that  it  is  Christ  alone  who  has 
revealed  God  the  Father  to  man.  It  is  written  that  "  no 
man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time :  the  only  begotten  Son, 
which  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  he  hath  declared 
him." 

The  eye  of  mortal  man  has  never  beheld  God  the 
Father.  No  man  could  bear  the  sight.  Even  to  Moses 
it  was  said,  "  Thou  canst  not  see  my  face :  for  there 
shall  no  man  see  me,  and  live."  (Exod.  xxxiii.  20.) 
Yet  all  that  mortal  man  is  capable  of  knowing  about 
God  the  Father  is  fully  revealed  to  us  by  God  the  Son. 
He,  who  was  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father  from  all  eternity, 
has  been  pleased  to  take  our  nature  upon  Him,  and  to 


37 

exhibit  to  us  in  the  form  of  man,  all  that  our  minds  can 
comprehend  of  the  Father's  perfections.  In  Christ's  words, 
and  deeds,  and  life,  and  death,  we  learn  as  much  concern- 
ing God  the  Father  as  our  feeble  minds  can  at  present 
bear.  His  perfect  wisdom, — His  almighty  power, — His 
unspeakable  love  to  sinners, — His  incomparable  holiness, — 
His  hatred  of  sin,  could  never  be  -epresented  to  our  eyes 
more  clearly  than  we  see  them  in  Christ's  life  and  death. 
In  truth,  "  God  was  manifest  in  the  flesh,"  when  the  Word 
took  on  Him  a  body.  "He  was  the  brightness  of  the 
Father's  glory,  and  the  express  image  of  His  person." 
He  says  Himself,  "  I  and  my  Father  are  one."  "  He  that 
hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father."  *'  In  Him  dw^elleth 
all  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily."  (Coloss.  ii.  9.) 
These  are  deep  and  mysterious  things.  But  they  are  true. 
(1  Tim.  iii.  16  ;  Heb.  i.  3  ;  John  x.  30  ;  xiv.  9.) 

And  now,  after  reading  this  passage,  can  we  ever  give 
too  much  honour  to  Christ?  Can  we  ever  think  too 
highly  of  Him  ?  Let  us  banish  the  unworthy  thought 
from  our  minds  for  ever.  Let  us  learn  to  exalt  Him 
more  in  our  hearts,  and  to  rest  more  confidingly  the  whole 
weight  of  our  souls  in  His  hands.  Men  may  easily  fall 
into  error  about  the  three  Persons  in  the  holy  Trinity 
if  they  do  not  carefully  adhere  to  the  teaching  of  Scrip- 
ture. But  no  man  ever  errs  on  the  side  of  giving  too 
much  honour  to  God  the  Son.  Christ  is  the  meeting- 
point  between  the  Trinity  and  the  sinner's  soul.  "He 
that  honoureth  not  the  Son,  honoureth  not  the  Father 
which  sent  Him."  (John  v.  23.) 

Notes.     John  I.  15 — 18. 

15. — [John  hare  witness....cried.]  The  time  at  which  John  the 
Baptist  bore  this  testimony  is  not  specified.  We  have  not  yet 
come  to  the  historic  part  of  John's  Gospel,  properly  speaking. 
We  are  still  in  the  i  troductory  preface.  It  seems  therefore 
probable,  as  Lightfoot  says,  that  the  sentence  before  us  describea 


88  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

the  habitual  character  of  John's  testimony  to  Christ.  He  was, 
throughout  his  ministry,  continually  proclaiming  Christ's  great- 
ness  and  superiority  to  himself,  both  in  nature  and  dignity. 

[Cried]  The  Greek  word  so  rendered,  implies  a  very  loud 
cry,  like  that  of  one  making  a  proclamation.  Parkhurst  defines 
it  in  this  place  as  "  speaking  out  very  openly." 

[He  that  Cometh  after  me.. ..pr^ef erred  hefore....was  hefore  we. 
This  sentence  has  caused  much  discussion  and  some  difference 
of  opinion.  The  Greek  words  literally  translated  would  be, 
"  He  that  cometh  after  me  has  become,  or  been  made,  in  front 
of  me, — for  he  was  first  of  me."  I  feel  no  doubt  that  our  English 
version  gives  the  correct  meaning  of  the  sentence. — Hammond's 
note  on  the  text  is  very  good. 

The  first  "  before,"  signifies  before  in  place,  position,  or  dig- 
nity. The  Greek  adverb  so  rendered,  is  used  forty-nine  times 
in  the  New  Testament,  but  never  once  in  the  sense  of  "  before 
in  point  of  time  or  age." 

The  second  "  before,"  signifies  before  in  point  of  time  or  ex- 
istence. "  He  was  existing  before  me,  at  the  time  when  I  was 
not."  The  expression  is  certainly  remarkable  and  uncommon, 
but  there  is  another  exactly  like  it  in  this  Gospel,  "  It  hated  me 
before  it  hated  you,"  where  the  literal  rendering  would  be,  "it 
hated  me  first  of  you." 

The  sentence  "  he  was  before  me,"  is  a  distinct  statement  of 
Christ's  pre-existence.  He  was  born  at  least  six  months  after 
John  the  Baptist,  and  was  therefore  younger  in  age  than  John. 
Yet  John  says,  "  He  was  before  me.  He  was  existing  when  I 
was  born,"  If  he  had  meant  only,  that  our  Lord  was  a  more 
honourable  person  than  himself,  he  would  surely  have  said,  "  He 
is  before  me." 

The  greatness  of  John  the  Baptist's  spiritual  knowledge  ap- 
pears in  this  expression.  He  understood  the  doctrine  of  Christ's 
pre-existence.  Christians  are  apt  to  think  far  too  slightingly 
of  John  the  Baptist's  attainments,  and  the  depths  of  his  teach- 
ing. 

16. — [Q/*  His  fulness  have  all  we  received^  This  sentence  means, 
"  all  we  who  believe  on  Jesus,  have  received  an  abundant  sup- 
ply of  all  that  our  souls  need  out  of  the  fall  store  that  resides  in 
Him  for  His  people.  It  is  from  Christ  and  Christ  alone,  that  all 
our  spiritual  wants  have  been  supplied." 

Waterland,  in  his  book  oa  the  Trinity,  calls  particular  atten- 
tion to  this  expression.  He  thinks  that  it  was  specially  used 
with  a  view  to  the  strange  doctrines  of  the  Gnostics  in  general, 
and  th«  Cerinthians  in  particular,  whose  heresies  arose  before 


JOHN,   CHAP.   I.  39 

St.  Jo-  n's  Gospel  was  written.  They  seem  to  have  held  that 
there  was  a  certain  fulness  or  plenitude  of  the  Deity,  into  which 
only  certain  spiiitnnl  men,  including  themselves,  were  to  be 
received,  and  from  which  others  who  were  less  spiritual,  though 
they  had  grace,  were  to  be  excluded.  "  St.  John,"  says  Water- 
land,  "  here  asserts,  that  all  Christians,  equally  and  indiflferently, 
all  behevers  at  large,  have  received  of  the  plenitude  or  fulness 
of  the  divine  Word,  and  that  not  sparingly,  but  in  the  largest 
measure,  even  grace  upon  grace." 

Melancthon  on  this  verse,  caUs  particular  attention  to  the 
word  "  all,"  He  observes  that  it  embraces  the  whole  Church  of 
God,  from  Adam  downwards.  All  who  have  been  saved  have 
received  out  of  Christ's  fulness,  and  all  other  sources  of  fulness 
are  distinctly  excluded. 

[Grace  for  grace.]  This  expression  is  very  pecuHar,  and  haa 
caused  much  dijBference  of  opinion  among  commentators. 

1.  Some  think  it  means  "the  new  grace  of  the  Gospel  in 
place  of.  or  instead  of,  the  old  grace  of  the  law."  This  is  the 
view  of  Cyril,  Chrysostom,  Theophylact,  Euthymius,  Rupertus, 
Lyranus,  Bucer,  Beza,  ScaHger,  De  Dieu,  Calovius,  Jansenius, 
Lampe,  and  Quesnel. 

2.  Some  think  that  it  means  "grace,  on  account  of  God's 
grace  or  favour,  and  specially  His  favour  towards  His  Son." 
This  is  the  view  of  Zwingle,  Melancthon,  Chemnitius,  Flacius, 
RoUock,  Grotius,  Camerarius,  Tarnovius,  Toletus,  Barradius, 
Cartwright,  and  Cornelius  a  Lapide. 

3.  Some  think  that  it  means  "  grace  on  account  of,  or  in  return 
for,  the  grace  of  faith  that  is  in  us."  This  is  the  view  of  Augus- 
tine, Gomarus,  and  Beda. 

4.  Some  think  that  it  means  "  grace  answering  to,  or  propor- 
tioned to,  the  grace  that  is  in  Christ."  This  is  the  view  of  Cal- 
vin, Leigh,  and  Bridge. 

5.  Some  think  that  it  means  "  grace  for  the  propagation  of 
grace."     This  is  the  view  of  Lightfoot. 

6.  Some  think  that  it  means  "  accumulated  grace,  abundant 
grace,  grace  upon  grace."  This  is  the  view  of  Schleusner,  Winer, 
Bucer,  Pellican,  Musculus,  Gualter,  Poole,  Nifanius,  Pearce, 
Bnrkitt,  Doddridge,  Bengel,  A.  Clarke,  Tittman,  Olshausen, 
Barnes,  and  Alford. 

Brentius,  Bullinger,  Aretius,  Jansenius,  Hutcheson,  Gill,  Scott, 
and  Henry,  give  several  views,  but  signify  their  adhesion  to  no 
one  in  particular. 

On  the  whole,  I  am  inchned  to  think  that  the  sixth  and  last 


40  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

is  the  correct  view.  I  admit  fully  that  the  Greek  preposition, 
here  rendered  ''for,"  is  only  found  in  three  senses  in  the  G-reek 
Testament,— viz. :  "  In  the  room  or  place  of."  (Matt.  li.  22.)  "  In 
return  for."  .(Rom.  xii.  17.)  and  ''  On  account  of"  (Acts  xii.  23  ; 
Ephes.  V.  31.)  Ill  composition  it  also  signifies  "  opposition," 
but  with  that  we  have  nothing  to  do  here.  In  the  present  case 
I  think  the  meaning  is  "  grace  in  the  place  of  grace,  constant, 
fresh,  abundant  suppUes  of  new  grace,  to  take  the  place  of  old 
grace,  and  therefore  unfaihng,  abundant  grace,  continually  fill- 
ing up  and  supplying  all  our  need." 

17. — [For  the  law  was  given,  Sc]  This  verse  seems  intended  to 
show  the  inferiority  of  the  law  to  the  Gospel.  It  does  so  by 
putting  in  strong  contrast  the  leading  characteristics  of  the  Old 
and  New  dispensations, — the  religion  which  began  with  Moses, 
and  the  religion  which  began  with  Christ. 

By  Mose5  was  given  the  law, — the  moral  law,  full  of  high  and 
holy  demands,  and  of  stern  threatenings  against  disobedience  ; 
— the  ceremonial  law,  full  of  burdensome  sacrifices,  ordinances, 
and  ceremonie.^,  which  never  healed  the  worshipper's  conscience, 
and  at  best  were  only  shadows  of  good  things  to  come. 

By  Christ,  on  the  other  hand,  came  grace  and  truth, — grace 
by  the  full  manifestation  of  God's  plan  of  salvation,  and  the  offer 
of  complete  pardon  to  every  soul  that  believes  on  Jesus, — and 
truth,  by  the  unveiled  exhibition  of  Christ  Himself,  as  the  true 
sacrifice,  the  true  Priest,  and  the  true  atonement  for  sin. 

Augustine,  on  this  verse,  says,  "  The  law  threatened,  not 
helped;  commanded,  not  healed;  showed,  not  took  away,  our 
feebleness.  But  it  made  ready  for  the  Physician,  who  was  to 
come  with  grace  and  truth." 

18.— [A^o  man  hath  seen  God,  c&c]  This  verse  seems  intended  to 
show  the  infinite  personal  superiority  of  Christ  to  Moses,  or  to 
any  other  saint  that  ever  lived. 

No  man  hath  ever  seen  God  the  Father ;  neither  Abraham  nor 
Moses,  nor  Joshua,  nor  David,  nor  Isaiah,  nor  Daniel.  All 
these,  however  holy  and  good  men,  were  still  only  men,  and 
quite  incapable  of  beholding  God  face  to  face,  from  very  weak- 
ness. What  they  knew  of  God  the  Father,  they  knew  only  by 
report,  or  by  special  revelation,  vouchsafed  to  them  from  time  to 
time.  They  were  but  servants,  and  "  The  servant  knoweth  not 
what  his  lord  doeth."  (John  xv.  15.) 

Christ  on  tne  other  hand,  is  the  only  begotten  Son,  which  if 
in  the  bosom  of  the  Father.  He  is  one  who  is  most  intimately 
united  fiora  all  eternity  to  God  the  Father,  and  is  equal  to  Him 
in  all  things.  He,  during  the  time  of  His  earthly  ministry  here, 
fully  showed  to  man  all  that  man  can  bear  to  know  concerning 


41 

His  Father.  lie  has  revealed  His  Father's  wisdom,  and  hoKnes^, 
aud  compas-ion,  and  power,  and  hatred  of  siu,  and  love  of  sin- 
ner.?, in  the  fullest  possible  way.  He  has  brou,2:ht  into  clear 
light  the  great  mystery  how  God  the  Father  can  be  just,  and 
yet  justify  the  ungodly.  The  knowledge  of  the  Father  which  a 
man  derived  from  the  teaching  of  Moses,  is  as  ditferentfrom  that 
derived  from  the  teaching  of  Christ,  as  twilight  is  different  from 
noon-day. 

We  must  carefully  remember  that  none  of  the  appearances  of 
God  to  man,  described  in  the  Old  Testament,  were  the  appear- 
ances of  God  the  Father.  He  whom  Abraham,  and  Jacob,  and 
Moses,  and  Joshua,  and  Isaiah,  and  Daniel  saw,  was  not  the 
First  Person  in  the  Trinity,  but  the  Second. 

The  speculations  of  some  commentators  on  the  sentence  now 
before  us,  as  to  whether  any  created  being,  angel  or  spirit,  has 
ever  seen  God  the  Father,  are,  to  say  the  least,  unprofitable. 
The  sentence  before  us  speaks  of  man,  being  written  lor  man's 
use. 

The  expression,  "  Which  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,"  is 
doubtless  a  figurative  one,  mercifully  accommodated  to  man's 
capacity.  As  one  who  lies  in  the  bosom  of  another  is  fairly  sup- 
posed to  be  most  intimate  with  him,  to  know  all  his  secrets,  and 
possess  all  his  affections,  so  is  it,  we  are  to  understand,  in  the 
union  of  the  Father  and  the  Son.  It  is  more  close  than  man's 
mind  can  conceive. 

The  Greek  word  rendered  "  declared,"  means  Hterally,  "hath 
expounded."  It  is  the  root  of  the  words,  which  are  well  known 
among  hterary  students  of  the  Bible,  "  exegesis  and  exegetical." 
The  idea  is  that  of  giving  a  full  and  particular  explanation. 
(Acts  XV.  14.)  Whether  the  "  Declaring  of  God  the  Father," 
here  described,  is  to  be  confined  to  Christ's  oral  teaching  about 
the  Father,  or  Avhether  it  means  also  that  Christ  has  in  His 
Person  given  a  visible  representation  of  many  of  the  Father's 
attributes,  is  a  doubtful  point.  Perhaps  both  ideas  are  included 
in  the  expression. 

In  leaving  this  passage,  I  must  say  something  about  the  dis- 
puted question,  To  whom  do  the  three  verses  beginning,  "  And 
of  his  fulness,"  belong?  Are  they  the  words  of  John  the  Bap- 
tist, and  a  part  of  his  test'mony  ?  Or  are  they  the  words  of 
John  the  Gospel-writer,  and  an  explanatory  comment  of  his, 
such  as  we  occasionally  find  in  his  Gospel? — There  is  something 
to  be  said  on  both  sides. 

(a.)  Some  think  that  these  three  verses  were  spoken  by  John 
the  Baptist,  because  of  the  awkwardness  and  abruptness  with 


42     ,  ■  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

which  his  testimony  eads  upon  the  other  theory, — because  they 
run  on  harmoniously  with  the  fifteenth  verse, — and  because 
there  is  nothing  in  them  which  we  might  not  reasonably  expect 
John  the  Baptist  to  say. 

This  is  the  opinion  of  Origen,  Athanasius,  Basil,  Cyprian, 
Augustine,  Theophylact,  Rupertus,  Melancthon,  Calvin,  Zwingle, 
Erasmus,  Chemnitins,  Grualter,  Musculus,  Bucer,  Flacius,  Bul- 
linger,  Pt^lican,  Toletus,  G-omarus,  Nifanius,  Rollock,  Poole, 
Burkitt,  Hutcheson,  Bengel,  and  Cartwright. 

(b.)  Others  think,  that  the  three  verses  are  the  comment  of 
John  the  Gospel-writer,  arising  out  of  John's  testimony  about 
Christ's  pre-existence,  and  out  of  the  expression,  Grace  and 
truth,  in  the  fourteenth  verse. — They  regard  the  verses  as  an 
exposition  of  the  expression,  "Full  of  grace  and  truth." — They 
question  whether  the  language  is  such  as  would  have  been  used 
by  John  the  Baptist, — whether  he  would  have  said  "  all  we," 
after  just  saying  "  me," — whether  he  would  have  used  the 
word  "fulness," — whether  he  would,  at  so  early  a  period,  have 
contrasted  the  religion  of  Moses  and  of  Christ, — and  whether 
he  would  have  so  openly  declared  Christ  to  be  the  only  begotten 
Son,  which  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father. — Finally,  they  think 
that  if  these  were  John  the  Baptist's  words,  the  Gospel  would 
not  have  begun  again  in  the  nineteenth  verse,  "  This  is  the 
record  of  John." 

This  is  the  opinion  of  Cyril,  Chrysostom,  Euthymius,  Beda, 
Lyranus,  Brentius,  Beza,  Ft^rus,  Grotius,  Aretius,  Barradius, 
Maldonatus,  Cornelius  a  Lapide,  Jansenius,  Lightfoot,  Arrow- 
smith.  Gill,  Doddri.lge,  Lampe,  Pearce,  Henry,  Tittman,  A. 
Clarke,  Barnes,  OLshausen,  Altord,  and  Wordsworth, — Baxter 
and  Scott  decline  any  decided  opinion  on  the  point,  and  Whitby 
says  nothing  about  it. 

The  arguments  on  either  side  are  so  nicely  balanced,  and  the 
names  on  either  side  are  so  weighty,  that  I  venture  an  opinion 
with  much  difl&dence.  But  on  the  whole,  I  am  inclined  to  think 
that  the  three  verses  are  not  the  words  of  John  the  Baptist,  but 
of  John  the  Evangelist. — The  remarkable  style  of  the  first  eight- 
een verses  of  this  chapter  makes  the  abruptness  and  brevity  of 
the  testimony  which  John  the  Baptist  bears,  upon  this  theory, 
appear  to  me  not  strange. — And  the  connection  between  the 
three  verses,  and  the  words  "full  of  grace  and  truth"  in  the 
fourteenth  verse,  appears  to  me  much  more  marked  and  d'stinct, 
than  the  conned  ion  between  John's  testimony,  and  the  words 
"  of  his  fulness  all  we  have  received." 

Happily  the  point  is  one  which  involves  no  serious  question, 
and  is  therefore  one  on  which  Christians  may  be  content  to 
differ,  if  they  cannot  convince  one  another. 


JOHN,    CHAP.   I. 


43 


JOHN  I.  19—28. 


24  And  they  ■which  were  sent 
were  of  the  Pharisees. 

25  And  they  asked  him,  and  said 
unto  him,  Why  baptizest  thou  then, 
if  thou  be  not  that  Christ,  nor  Elias, 
neither  tha^  prophet  ? 

26  John  answered  them  saying, 
I  baptize  with  water:  but  there 
standeth  one  among  you,  whom  ye 
know  not ; 

27  He  it  is,  who  coming  after 
me  is  preferred  before  me,  whose 
shoe's  latchet  I  am  not  worthy  to 
unloose. 

28  These  things  were  done  in 
Bethabara  beyond  Jordan,  where 
John  was  baptizing. 


19  And  this  is  the  record  of 
John,  when  the  Jews  sent  Priests 
and  Levites  from  Jerusalem  to  ask 
him,  "Who  art  thou  ? 

20  And  he  confessed,  and  de- 
nied not ;  but  confessed,  I  am  not 
the  Christ. 

21  And  they  asked  him.  What 
then?  Art  thou  Elias?  And  he 
saith,  I  am  not.  Art  thou  that 
prophet?    And  he  answered,  No. 

22  Then  said  they  unto  him,  Who 
art  thou?  that  we  may  give  an 
answer  to  them  that  sent  us.  What 
sayest  thou  of  thyself? 

23  He  said,  I  am  the  voice  of 
one  crying  in  the  wilderness,  Make 
straight  the  way  of  the  Lord,  as 
said  the  prophet  Esaias. 

The  verses  we  have  now  read  begin  the  properly  histori- 
cal part  of  St.  John's  Gospel.  Hitherto  we  have  been 
reading  deep  and  weighty  statements  about  Christ's  divine 
nature,  incarnation,  and  dignity.  Now  we  come  to  the 
plain  narrative  of  the  days  of  Christ's  earthly  ministry,  and 
the  plain  story  of  Christ's  doings  and  sayings  among  men. 
And  here,  like  the  other  Gospel-writers,  St.  John  begins  at 
once  with  "  the  record  "  or  testimony  of  John  the  Baptist. 
(Matt.  iii.  1 ;  Mark  i.  2 ;  Luke  iii.  2.) 

We  have,  for  one  thing,  in  these  verses,  an  instructive 
example  of  true  humility.  That  example  is  supplied  by 
John  the  Baptist  himself. 

John  the  Baptist  was  an  eminent  saint  of  God.  There 
are  few  names  which  stand  higher  than  his  in  the  Bible 
calendar  of  great  and  good  men.  The  Lord  Jesus  Himself 
declared  that  "Among  them  that  are  born  of  woman  there 
hath  not  risen  a  greater  than  John  the  Baptist."  (Matt. 
xi.  11.)  The  Lord  Jesus  Himself  declared  that  he  was  "  a 
burning  and  a  shining  light."  (John  v.  35.)     Yet  here  in 


44  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

tbis  passage  we  see  this  emincDt  saint  lowly,  self-abased, 
and  full  of  humility.  He  puts  away  from  himself  ihi 
honour  which  the  Jews  from  Jerusalem  were  ready  to  paj 
him.  He  declines  all  flattering  titles.  He  speaks  of  him.J 
self  as  nothing  more  than  the  '.'  voice  of  one  crying  in  th( 
wilderness,"  and  as  one  who  "  baptized  with  water."  He 
proclaims  loudly  that  there  is  One  standing  among  the 
Jews  far  greater  than  himself.  One  whose  shoe-latchet  he 
is  not  worthy  to  unloose.  He  claims  honour  not  for  him- 
self but  for  Christ.  To  exalt  Christ  was  his  mission,  and 
to  that  mission  he  steadfastly  adheres. 

The  greatest  saints  of  God  in  every  age  of  the  Church 
have  always  been  men  of  John  the  Baptist's  spirit.  In 
gifts,  and  knowledge,  and  general  character  they  have 
often  differed  widely.  But  in  one  respect  they  have 
always  been  alike; — they  have  been  "clothed  with  hu- 
mility." (1  Pet.  V.  5.)  They  have  not  sought  their  own 
honour.  They  have  thought  little  of  themselves.  They 
have  been  ever  willing  to  decrease  if  Christ  might  only 
increase,  to  be  nothing  if  Christ  might  be  all.  And  here 
has  been  the  secret  of  the  honour  God  has  put  upon  them. 
"  He  that  humbleth  himself  shall  be  exalted."  (Luke  xiv.  11.) 

If  we  profess  to  have  any  real  Christianity,  let  us  strive 
to  be  of  John  the  Baptist's  spirit.  Let  us  study  humility. 
This  is  the  grace  with  which  all  must  begin,  who  would  be 
saved.  We  have  no  true  religion  about  us,  until  we  ca^t 
away  our  high  thoughts,  and  feel  ourselves  sinners. — This 
is  the  grace  which  all  saints  may  follow  after,  and  which 
none  have  any  excuse  for  neglecting.  All  God's  children 
have  not  gifts,  or  money,  or  time  to  work,  or  a  wide  sphere 
of  usefulness  ;  but  all  may  be  humble. — This  is  the  grace, 
above  all,  which  will  appear  most  beautiful  in  our  latter 
end.  Kever  shall  we  feel  the  need  of  humility  so  deeply, 
as  when  we  lie  on  our  deathbeds,  and  stand  before  the 
jiidgment-seat  of  Christ.     Our  whole  lives  will  then  appeal 


45 

a  long  catalogue  of  imperfections,  ourselves  nothing,  and 
Christ  all. 

We  have,  for  another  thing,  in  these  verses,  a  raoumful 
example  of  the  blinchiess  of  unconverted  men.  That  ex- 
ample is  supplied  by  the  state  of  the  Jews  who  came  to 
question  John  the  Baptist. 

These  Jews  professed  to  be  waiting,  for  the  appearance 
of  Messiah.  Like  all  the  Pharisees  they  prided  themselves 
on  being  children  of  Abraham,  and  possessors  of  the  cove- 
nants. They  rested  in  the  law,  and  made  their  boast  of 
God.  They  professed  to  know  God's  will,  and  to  believe 
God's  promises.  They  w^ere  confident  that  they  themselves 
were  guides  of  the  bhnd,  and  lights  of  them  that  sat  in 
darkness.  (Rom.  ii.  17 — 19.)  And  yet  at  this  very 
moment  their  souls  were  utterly  in  the  dark.  "  There  was 
standing  among  them,"  as  John  the  Baptist  told  them, 
"  One  whom  they  knew  not."  Christ  Himself,  the  promis- 
ed Messiah,  was  in  the  midst  of  them,  and  yet  they  neither 
knew  Him,  nor  saw  Him,  nor  received  Him,  nor  acknow- 
ledged Him,  nor  believed  Him.  And  w^orse  than  this,  the 
vast  majority  of  them  never  would  know  Him !  The 
words  of  John  the  Baptist  are  a  prophetic  description  of  a 
state  of  things  which  lasted  during  the  whole  of  onr  Lord's 
earthly  ministry.  Christ  "  stood  among  the  Jews,"  and 
yet  the  Jews  knew  Him  not,  and  the  greater  part  of  them 
died  in  their  sins. 

It  is  a  solemn  thought  that  John  the  Baptist's  words  in 
this  place  apply  strictly  to  thousands  in  the  present  day. 
Christ  is  still  standing  among  many  who  neither  see,  nor 
know,  nor  believe.  Christ  is  passing  by  in  many  a  parish 
and  many  a  congregation,  and  the  vast  mnjority  have 
neither  an  eye  to  see  Him,  nor  an  ear  to  hear  Him.  The 
spirit  of  slumber  seems  poured  out  upon  them.  Money, 
and  pleasure,  and  the  world  they  know  ;  but  tht/  know 
not  Chribt.     The  kinijjdom  of  God  is  close  to  them  ;  but 


46  EXPOSITOKY  THOUGHTS. 

they  sleep,  Salvation  is  within  their  reach ;  but  they  sleep 
Mercy,  grace,  peace,  heaven,  eternal  life,  are  so  nigh  that 
they  might  touch  thera ;  and  yet  they  sleep.  "Christ 
standeth  among  them  and  they  know  him  not."  These  are 
sorrowful  things  to  write  down.  But  every  faithful  minis- 
ter of  Christ  can  testify,  like  John  the  Baptist,  that  they 
are  true. 

What  are  we  doing  ourselves  ?  This,  after  all,  is  the 
great  question  that  concerns  us.  Do  we  know  the  extent 
of  our  religious  privileges  in  this  country,  and  in  these 
times  ?  Are  we  aware  that  Christ  is  going  to  and  fro  in 
our  land,  inviting  souls  to  join  Him  and  to  be  His  disciples  ? 
Do  we  know  that  the  time  is  short  and  that  the  door  of 
mercy  will  soon  be  closed  for  evermore  ?  Do  we  know 
that  Christ  rejected  will  soon  be  Christ  withdrawn  ? — 
Happy  are  they  who  can  give  a  good  account  of  these 
inquiries  and  who  "  know  the  day  of  their  visitation  !" 
(Luke  xix.  44.)  It  will  be  better  at  the  last  day  never  to 
have  been  born,  than  to  have  had  Christ  *'  standing  among 
us  "  and  not  to  have  known  Him. 

Notes.     John  I.  19 — 28. 

19. — [This  is  the  record.]  The  Greek  word  translated  "record,"  is 
the  same  that  is  rendered  •'  witness"  in  the  7th  verse.  The  sen- 
tence means,  "  this  is  the  testimony  that  John  bore." 

[WAen.]  This  word  raises  the  question,  "  At  what  time  was 
this  testimony  of  John  borne?"  It  appears  to  have  been  after 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ's  b;iptism,  and  at  the  end  of  Bis  forty 
days'  temptation  in  the  wilderness.  The  29th  verse  tells  us,  that 
"  the  next  day  John  seeth  Jesus  coming  to  him."  It  is  worthy 
of  notice  that  nowhere  in  the  Gospels  do  we  find  "days  "so 
carefully  marked,  as  in  that  portion  of  the  first  chapter  of  St. 
John,  which  we  have  now  begun. 

[The  Jevs.]  This  expression  is  remarkable,  a"=5  pecuhar  to  St. 
John's  Gospel,  lie  generally  speaks  of  our  Lord  s  en(  mies  and 
questioners,  as  "the  Jews."  It  seems  to  indicate  that  St.  John 
did  not  write  his  Gospel  in  Palestine  or  at  Jerusalem,  and  that 
it  was  written  especially  for  the  Gentile  Christians  scatteied 
over  the  world,  and  much  later  than  the  other  three  Gospels. 


JOHN,    CHAP.    I.  47 

[Sent  Priests  and  Levites....  Jerusalem.]  These  words  show  that 
those  who  questioned  John  the  Baptist  on  this  occasion,  were  a 
formal  deputation,  senl  with  authority  from  the  Sanhedrim,  or 
ecclesiastical  council  of  the  Jews,  to  inquire  about  John's  pro- 
ceedings, and  to  report  Avhat  he  taught,  and  whom  he  gave  him- 
self out  to  be. 

Wordsworth  remarks,  that  "More  honour  was  paid  by  the 
Jews  to  John  than  to  Christ,  both  ia  the  persons  s(mt,  and  in 
the  place  from  which  they  were  sent.  They  esteemed  John  for 
his  sacerdotal  lineage."  When  Christ  appeared,  they  called  Him. 
the  Carpenter's  Son.  Our  Lord  refers  to  this  great  respect  at 
first  shown  to  John,  when  He  says,  "ye  were  wilhng  for  a 
season  to  rejoice  in  his  light."  (John  v.  33.) 

[To  ash  him,  Who  a7^t  thou?]  We  can  hardly  suppo-e  that 
these  Priests  and  Levites  were  ignorant  that  John  was  the  son 
of  a  priest,  Zacharias,  and  therefore  a  Levite  himself.  Their 
inquiry  seems  to  refer  to  John's  office.  "  What  did  he  profess  to 
be  ?  Did  he  assume  to  be  the  Messiah  ?  Did  he  claim  to  be  a 
prophet?  What  reason  could  he  assign  for  his  having  taken  up 
his  remarkable  position  as  a  preacher  and  a  baptizer  at  a  distance 
from  Jerusalem  ?  What  account  could  he  give  of  himself  and 
his  ministry  ?" 

Two  things  are  plainly  taught  in  this  verse.  One  is,  the  great 
sensation  which  John  the  Baptist's  ministry  caused  throughout 
Palestine.  He  attracted  so  much  notice,  and  such  crowds  fol- 
lowed him,  that  the  Sanhedrim  felt  it  necessary  to  inquire  about 
him. — The  other  is,  the  state  of  expectation  in  which  the  minds 
of  the  Jews  were  at  this  particular  season.  Partly  from  the 
seventy  weeks  of  Daniel  having  expired,  partly  from  the  sceptre 
having  practically  departed  from  Judah,  there  was  evidently  an 
expectation  that  some  remarkable  person  was  about  to  appear. 
— As  to  the  sort  of  person  the  Jews  expected,  it  is  plain  that 
they  only  looked  for  a  temporal  King,  who  would  make  them 
once  more  an  independent  nation.  They  had  no  idea  of  a  spiri- 
tual Saviour  from  sin.  But  as  to  the  fact  that  this  vague  expecta- 
tion existed  throughout  the  East  at  this  particular  time,  w^have 
the  direct  testimony  of  Latin  historians.  The  extraordmary 
ministry  of  John  the  Baptist,  at  once  suggested  the  idea  to  the 
Jews  at  Jerusalem,  that  he  might  possibly  be  the  expected 
Redeemer.  Therefore  they  sent  to  ask,  "Who  art  thou?  Art 
thou  the  long  expected  King?" 
20. — [Re  confessed....denied  not....confessed^  &c.]  ,  This  is  a  peculiar 
form  of  speech,  implying  a  very  positive,  unmistakeable,  empha- 
tic assf-veration.  It  gives  the  idea  of  a  man  shrinking  with  holy 
indignation  from  the  very  thought  of  being  regarded  as  the 
Christ ; — "  Pain  me  not  by  suggesting  that  such  an  one  as  I  can 
be  the  Christ  of  God.     I  am  one  far  inferior  to  Him." 


48    •  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

Bengel  says  on  this  verse,  ''  Whilst  John  denied  himself,  he 
did  not  deny  Christ." — Luther  makes  some  excellent  remarks  on 
the  strong  temptation  which  was  here  put  in  John's  way,  to  take 
honour  to  himself,  and  the  humility  and  faith  which  he  showed 
in  overcoming  it. 

21. — [Art  tliou  Elias  ?]  This  question  was  not  an  absurd  and 
unnatural  one,  as  some  commentators  have  thought  fit  to  say. 
It  was  based  upon  that  prophecy  of  Malachi,  which  speaks  of 
God  "sending  EUjah  the  prophet  before  the  great  and  terrible 
day  of  the  Lord."  (Mai.  iv,  5  )  The  manner,  dress,  and  ministry 
of  John  the  Baptist,  as  well  as  his  appearing  in  the  wilderness, 
constituted  a  great  similarity  between  him  and  Elijah,  and  sug- 
gested tlie  idea  that  John  might  possibly  be  Elijah.  "  If  this 
man,"  thought  the  Priests  and  Levites,  "  is  not  the  Christ,  per- 
haps he  is  his  forerunner,  the  prophet  Elijah." 

[And  he  saith^  I  am  not.]  This  answer  of  John's  deserves 
particular  notice,  and  involv^es  a  grave  difficulty.  How  could 
John  say,  "  I  am  not  Elias,"  when  Christ  says  distinctly  in  ano- 
ther place,  ''  This  is  Elias."  How  shall  we  reconcile  these  two 
statements  ? — To  me  it  seems  impossible  to  explain  John's  words, 
except  on  the  simple  theory,  that  there  are  two  comings  of 
Elijah  the  prophet.  The  first  was  only  a  coming  in  spjrit  and 
in  power,  but  not  a  literal  coming.  The  second  will  be  a  literal 
and  real  appearance  on  earth  of  him  whom  Ehsha  saw  taken  up 
into  heaven.  The  first  coming  took  place  at  Christ's  first  advent, 
and  was  fulfilled  by  John  the  Baptist  going  before  Messiah's  face 
in  the  spirit  and  power  of  Elijah.  The  second  coming  of  Elijah 
will  take  place  at  the  second  advent  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  will  be 
fulfilled  by  Elijah  himself  once  more  coming  as  a  prophet  to  the 
tribes  of  Israel. 

It  is  of  this  second,  future,  literal  coming  of  Elias  that  John 
speaks  in  this  place.  When  he  says,  "  I  am  not  Elias,"  he  means, 
"  I  am  not  that  Elijah  you  mean,  who  was  taken  up  to  heaven 
900  years  ago.  The  coming  of  that  Elijah  is  yet  a  future  thing. 
I  am  the  forerunner  of  the  first  advent  in  humiliation,  not  of  the 
second  advent  in  glory.  I  am  not  the  herald  of  Christ  coming 
to  reign,  as  Elijah  will  be  one  day,  but  the  herald  of  Christ  com- 
ing to  suffer  on  the  cross.  I  am  not  come  to  prepare  the  way 
for  a  conquering  Kin;r,  such  as  you  fondly  expect,  but  for  a  meek 
and  lowly  Saviour,  whose  great  work  is  to  bear  our  tins  and  to 
die.     I  am  not  the  Elias  you  expect." 

In  confirmation  of  this  view,  our  Lnr  "'s  remarkable  words  in 
another  Grospel.  ought  to  be  carefully  studied.  He  says  distinctly 
"Elias  iruly  sliall  first  cane,  and  rest  >re  all  things,"  (Ma't.  xvii. 
11.)  And  yet  He  adds  in  the  same  breath,  "  I  say  unto  you 
.  that  Elias  is  come  already,"  that  is,  "  He  is  come,  in  a  certain 


49 

sense,  by  John  the  Baptist  going  before  my  face  in  the  spirit  and 
]  ower  of  Ehas."  In  short,  our  Lord  says  at  the  same  time, 
"Eiias  shall  come,"  and  "Elias  is  come!" — To  me  His  words 
seem  a  plain  proof  of  the  theory  I  am  here  mninta-ning,  that 
there  are  two  comings  of  Elias.  In  spirit  Elias  came,  when  John 
the  Baptist  came,  a  man  like  to  Elias  in  mind  and  habits.  But 
in  the  flesh  Elias  has  not  yet  come,  and  is  yet  to  appear.  And 
it  was  in  the  view  of  this  future,  literal  coming,  that  John  the 
Baptist  saM,  ''  I  am  not  Elias." — He  knew  th  it  the  Jews  were 
thinking  of  the  times  of  Messiah's  glory,  and  of  the  literal  com- 
ing of  Elijah,  which  would  usher  in  those  times.  Therefore  he 
says,  "I  am  not  the  E  ias  you  mean.  I  belong  to  a  different 
dispensation." 

The  other  view,  which  is  undoubtedly  ma'ntained  by  the  vast 
majority  of  commentators,  appears  to  me  surrounded  with  insu- 
perable difl&culties.  According  to  them,  there  never  was  to  be 
more  than  one  fulfilment  of  Ma'achi's  prophecy  about  Elias.  It 
was  to  be  fulfilled  by  John  the  Baptist;  and  when  he  appeared, 
it  had  received  its  full  accomplishment.  How  John  the  Baptist's 
answer  in  tli's  place  can  be  satisfactorily  exp'ained,  according  to 
this  theory,  I  am  quite  unable  to  see.  The  Jcavs  ask  him  plaitdy, 
whether  he  is  Elias,  that  is,  whether  he  is  the  person  who  is  to 
fulfil  Malachi's  prophecy.  This,  at  any  rate,  was  evidently  the 
idea  in  their  minds.  He  answers  distinctly  that  he  is  not.  And 
yet  according  to  the  theory  against  which  I  contend,  he  wds 
Elias,  and  he  ought  to  have  rephed,  "  I  am."  In  short,  he 
appears  to  say  that  which  is  i.ot  true  ! — Tliere  never  was  to  be 
any  one  after  him,  who  was  to  fulfil  Malachi's  prophecy,  and  yet 
he  declares  in  effect  that  he  does  not  fulfil  it,  by  saying  that  ho 
is  not  Elias ! 

About  the  future  hteral  coming  of  Elijah  the  prophet,  when 
the  Jews  will  at  last  see  a  living  person,  who  will  say,  "  I  am 
EUas,"  this  is  not  the  place  to  speak.  Whether  or  not  he  will 
minister  to  any  but  the  Jews, — whether  or  not  he  will  prove 
one  of  the  two  witnesses  spoken  of  in  Etvelation,  (Rev.  xi.  3,) 
are  interesting  and  disputed  questions.  I  will  only  remark,  that 
the  subject  deserves  far  more  attention  than  it  ordinarily  receives. 

The  following  quotations  from  the  Fathers  will  show  that  the 
opinion  I  have  expressed  is  not  a  modern  one : 

Chrysostom,  on  Matt.  xvii.  10,  says,  "  As  there  are  two  com- 
ings of  Christ, — first,  to  suffer, — secondly,  to  judg.^,  so  there  are 
two  com'ngs  of  Elias ;  first  of  John  before  Christ's  first  coming, 
who  is  called  Elias,  l3ecause  he  came  in  the  manner  and  spirit 
of  Elias;  secondly,  of  the  person  of  Elijah,  the  Tishbite,  bef>re 
Christ's  second  coming." — Jerome  and  Theophylact  say  just  the 
same. 

3 


50  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

Gregory,  quoted  by  Mayer,  says,  "Whereas  John  deni^^th  him- 
self to  be  Ehas,  and  Christ  after  affirmeth  it,  there  is  no  contra- 
diction. There  is  a  double  coming  of  Elias.  The  one  is  in  spirit, 
before  Christ's  coming  to  redeem ;  the  other  in  person,  before 
Christ's  coming  to  judgment.  According  to  the  first,  Christ's 
s^.ying  is  true,  '  This  is  Ehas.'  According  to  the  second,  John's 
speech  is  true,  '  I  am  not.'  This  was  the  fittest  answer  to  men 
asking  in  a  curnal  sense." 

Augustine  says,  "  What  John  was  to  the  first  advent,  Ehas 
will  be  to  the  second  advent.  As  there  are  two  advents,  s )  there 
are  two  heralds." 

{Art  thou  that  prophet  ?]  There  are  two  views  of  this  ques- 
tion. Some  think,  as  Augustine  and  Gregory,  that  the  words 
should  be  as  our  marginal  reading  has  them,  "  Art  thou  a  pro- 
phet?" Others  think,  as  Cyril  and  Chrysostom,  that  the  ques- 
tion referred  to  ''  the  prophet,"  of  whom  Moses  foretold  that  he 
would  come.  (Deut.  xviii.  15.)  I  decidedly  prefer  the  latter 
view.  It  seems  veiy  improbable  that  John  the  Baptist  would 
entirely  deny  that  he  was  a  prophet. — Besides  this,  it  seems  not 
unreasonable  that  the  Jews  would  ask  whether  he  was  "  the 
great  prophet  foretold  by  Moses."  And  to  this  question,  John 
answers  most  truly,  that  he  was  not. — It  admits  of  doubt,  whe- 
ther the  Jews  who  qu^-sLioned  him,  clearly  saw  that  the  "pro- 
phet hke  unto  Moses,"  and  the  "  Messiah,"  were  to  be  one  and 
the  same.  It  rather  looks  as  if  they  thought  "  Christ  "  and  "  the 
prophet"  were  two  different  persons. 

Lightfoot  thinks  that  the  question  refers  to  a  common  expec- 
tation among  the  Jews,  that  the  prophets  were  to  rise  again  at 
the  coming  of  Messiah,  and  that  John's  questioners  meant,  "Art 
thou  one  of  the  prophets  raised  from  the  dead  ?"  This  supersti- 
tious notion  explains  the  words  of  the  disciples  in  Luke,  "  Others 
say  that  one  of  the  old  prophets  is  risen  again."  (Luke  ix.  19.) 
But  the  Greek  article  in  the  words  before  us,  seems  to  me  too 
strong  to  be  rendered  "  a  prophet." 

22. — [An  answer  to  them  that  sent  us.]  This  expression  c>  nfirms  the 
opinion  already  given,  about  the  character  of  those  who  ques- 
tioned John.     They  were  not  idle  inquirers,  but  a  formal  depu- 

•  tation  sent  down  from  the  Sanhedrim  at  Jerusalem,  with  a  c  im- 
mission  to  find  out  who  John  was,  and  to  make  a  report  of  what 
th  y  discovered. 

23, — [He  said,  I  am  the  voice,  <frc.]  John  the  Baptist's  account  of 
himself  in  this  verse,  consists  of  a  reference  to  Scripture.  He 
reminds  the  Priests  and  Levites  who  wanted  to  know  who  he 
was,  of  Isaiah's  prophecy  concerning  the  times  of  the  Messiah. 
(Isaiah  xl.  3.)  They  would  there  fmd  Isaiah  saying,  with  the 
abruptness  of  an  inspired  prophe",  and  speaking  as  if  he  saw 


51 

what  lie  was  describing,  "The  voice  of  Him  that  crielh  in  the 
wilderness  1"  That  means,  "I  hear  in  spirit,  as  I  look  forward 
to  Messiah's  time,  a  man  crying  in  a  wilderness,  prepare  ye  the 
way  of  the  Lord," — "  That  prophecy,"  says  John  the  Baptist, 
"  is  this  day  fulfilled  in  me.  I  am  the  person  whom  Isaiah  saw 
and  heard  in  vision.  I  am  come  to  prepare  the  way  for  Mes- 
siah, like  a  man  going  before  a  King  in  a  desert  country,  to  pre- 
pare a  road  for  his  master.  I  am  come  to  make  ready  the  barren 
hearts  of  the  Jewish  nation  for  Christ's  first  advtnt,  and  the 
kingdom  of  God.  I  am  only  a  voice.  I  do  not  come  to  work 
miracles.  I  do  not  want  disciples  to  follow  me,  but  my  master. 
The  object  of  my  mission  is  to  be  a  herald,  a  crier,  a  warning 
voice  to  my  fellow-countrymen,  so  that  when  my  master  begins 
His  ministry  they  may  not  be  found  unprepared." 

[The  wilderness.']  The  common  view  of  this  expression  is, 
that  it  refers  to  John  the  Baptist's  ministry  having  begun  in  the 
wilderness  of  Judaea.  I  rather  doubt  the  correctness  of  this  idea. 
The  whole  quotation  is  undeniably  figurative.  The  prophet  com- 
pares Messiah's  forerunner  to  one  preparing  a  road  for  a  King 
through  a  desert  or  uninhabited  country.  The  "  way  "  or  road, 
is  unquestionably  figurative,  and  the  straightness  of  the  way  too. 
No  one  supposes  that  Isaiah  meant  that  John  the  Baptist  was 
hteraUy  to  make  a  road.  But  if  the  ''  way  "  is  figurative,  the 
country  through  which  it  is  made  must  surely  be  figurative  too. 
I  therefore  think  that  the  wilderness  is  a  prophetical  and  figu- 
rative description  of  the  spiritual  barrenness  of  Israel,  when  the 
Messiah's  forerunner  began  his  ministry.  At  the  same  time, 
I  fully  admit  that  John's  retired  and  'ascetic  habits  and  hia 
residence  in  the  wilderness,  form  a  remarkable  coincidence  with 
the  text. 

The  expression  "  voice,"  has  often  been  remarked  as  a  beauti- 
ful illustration  of  the  general  character  of  John's  ministry.  He 
was  eminently  a  humble  man.  He  was  one  who  desired  to  be 
heard,  and  to  awaken  attention  by  the  sound  of  his  testimony, 
but  not  to  be  seen  or  visibly  honoured. 
2i..—[And  they....senf....Pharisees.]  The  object  of  this  verse  is 
somewhat  doubtful.  Some  think  that  it  refers  to  the  verse  pre- 
ceding, which  ontains  a  quotation  from  Isaiah.  They  which 
wer.'  s  nt,  being  Phui-ees,  and  not  Sadduoees  or  Herodian?, 
should  have  seen  and  admitted  the  Scriptural  charact  r  of  John's 
mi  s;on._Some  think,  :ti8  Bengel,  that  it  refers  to  the  following 
verse,  in  which  a  question  was  raised  about  baptism.  They 
which  ^^ere  sent,  being  Pharisees,  were  specially  strict  about 
cerenionies,  ordinances,  and  forms.  Therefore  they  were  not 
satisfied  with  a  reference  to  Scripture.  They  asked  John's 
authority  for  baptizing.  Some  think  that  it  refers  generally  to 
the  notorious    enmity  and    disUke  with    which    the  Phar.sees 


52  EXPOSITOKY  THOUGHTS. 

regarded  John  the  Baptist  all  through  his  ministry.  Our  Lord 
says  in  another  place,  "  They  rejected  the  counsel  of  God,  not 
being  baptized  by  him."  (Luke  vii.  30.)  The  text  before  us 
would  then  mean,  that  they  which  ask-d  all  these  questions, 
asked  them  with  a  thoroughly  unfriendly  spirit,  and  with  no 
real  desire  to  learn  Grod's  truth,  because  they  were  Pharisees. 

25. — [Why  haptizest  thou.. ..if  thou  he  not,  Sc]  This  verse  evidently 
imphes  that  John's  c[uestioners  expi  3ted  the  Messiah,  or  his  fore- 
runner, to  baptize  whenever  he  apptared.  It  is  not  unlikely,  as 
Lightfoot  says,  that  the  idea  arose  from  the  text  in  Ezekiel,  de- 
scribing Messiah's  time,  "  Then  will  I  sprinkle  clean  water  upon 
you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean,"  &c.  (Ezek.  xxxvi.  24.) 

Luther  thinks,  that  this  verse  shows  that  the  questioners  who 
came  to  John,  now  changed  their  tone.  Hitherto  they  had 
flattered.     Now  they  began  to  threaten. 

One  thing  is  yerj  clear  from  this  verse.  The  Jews  were  not 
unacquainted  with  baptism  as  a  religious  ordinance.  It  was 
one  of  the  ceremonies,  according  to  Lightfoot,  by  which  proselytes 
were  admitted  into  the  Jewish  Church.  Moreover  it  is  worthy 
of  notice,  that  when  proselytes  were  so  admitted,  their  children 
were  baptized  together  with  them.  It  was  not  therefore  the  fact 
of  John  baptizing,  which  the  Pharisees  here  called  in  question, 
but  his  authority  for  administering  baptism. 

26. — [/  laptize  with  water;  hut  <fcc.]  The  answer  of  John  the 
Baptist  here  reported  is  very  eUiptical,  and  the  full  meaning  of 
what  he  said  must  be  suppUed  fTom  other  places.  He  seems 
to  say,  "  I  do  not  baptize  by  my  own  authority,  but  by  a  com- 
mission fro  n  One  far  higher  than  either  you  or  I.  I  only 
baptize  with  Avater ;  and  I  do  not  do  it  to  make  disciples  for  my- 
self, but  for  my  master.  I  form  no  party.  I  ask  no  man  to  follow 
me.  I  tell  all  whom  I  baptize  to  believe  on  that  Mighty  One  who  is 
coming  after  me.  I  am  only  the  servant  of  One  far  gi-eater  than 
myself,  who  is  even  now  standing  among  you,  if  you  had  eyes  to 
see  him.  He  is  one  so  much  above  me  in  nature  and  dignity, 
that  I  am  not  worthy  to  be  his  humblest  servant.  He  can 
baptize  hearts,  and  will  fulfil  the  promises  about  Messiah,  to 
which  you  are  vaguely  referring.  In  the  mean  time  I  only 
baptize  with  water  all  those  who  profess  repentance  and  willing- 
ness to  receive  my  master. — I  baptize  for  another  and  not  for 
myself." 

[There  standeth  one  among  you.]  I  doubt  whether  these  wor  -s 
literally  mean,  "There  is  standing  in  the  crowd  of  you  m  • 
hearers."  I  prefer  the  sense,  "  there  is  already  living  and  abiding 
among  you  in  this  land  of  Judaui  one  greater  than  I."  I  think 
this  the  sense  because  of  the  words  in  the  29th  verse,  "  John 
seeth  Jesus  coming  to  him,"  which  seem  to  imply  that  he  was 


JOHN,    CHAP.   I.  53 

not  with  him  the  previous  clay. — The  thought  seems  parallel  to 
that  contained  in  the  words,  ,"  Tlie  kingdom  of  God  cometh 
not  with  observation." — "  The  messenger  of  Grod  cometh  sud- 
denly to  his  temple."  (Mai.  iii.  i ;  Luke  xvii.  20.)  All  serve  to 
point  to  the  same  truth,  viz. — that  when  Messiah  came  the  first 
time,  He  came  quietly,  Avithout  noise,  without  display,  without 
the  nation  of  the  Jews  knowing  it,  so  that  he  "stood  among 
them,"  and  yet  they  were  not  aware  of  His  presence. 

The  Greek  word  rendered  "standeth,"  is  in  the  perfect  tense, 
and  would  be  literally  rendered,  "  there  hath  stood,"  that  is, 
''hatli  stood  for  some  httle  time,  and  is  still  standing."  The 
Messiah  has  come  and  is  present.  Bengel  renders  it,  "  hath 
taken  his  stand." 

Tlie  view  I  have  maintained  of  the  meaning  of  the  word 
"  standeth,"  is  held  by  Parkhurst,  who  defines  it  as  "  being  or 
living,"  and  quotes  John  vi.  22,  as  a  parallel  instance.  Pearce 
takes  the  same  view,  and  quotes  Acts  xxvi.  22.  Jansenius 
renders  it,  "has  conversed  among  you,  as  when  he  sat  among 
the  doctors"  in  the  temple.  Aretius  renders  it,  "  He  is  present 
in  the  flesh,  and  walking  in  Judaea." 

f  Ye  know  not]  Tiiis  seems  to  mean,  not  only  that  the  Jews 
knew  not  Jesus  the  Messiah  by  sight,  but  that  they  had  no 
spiritual  knowledge  of  him,  and  of  the  true  nature  of  his  office, 
as  the  Saviour  of  sinners. — "  Ye  look  for  a  conquering,  reigning 
Messiah.  Ye  know  not  the  suffering  Messiah,  who  came  to  be 
cut  ofi",  and  to  be  crucified  for  sinners." 

Bengel  remarks,  that  John  is  here  specially  "  addressing 
inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  who  had  not  been  present  at  the 
bapdsm  of  Jesus.  And  he  Avhets  their  desires,  that  they  may  be 
anxious  to  become  acquainted  with  him." 

27. — [Coining  after... .preferred  before.]  The  remarks  made  on  the 
15th  verse  apply  fully  to  this  expression.  John  declares,  that 
though  his  master,  in  point  of  time,  began  his  ministry  after 
him,  in  point  of  dignity  he  was  far  above  him.  To  exalt  Christ, 
and  abase  himself,  seem  ideas  never  long  out  of  John's  mind. 

[Shoe's  lafchet... .worthy  to  unloose.]  This  is  evidently  a  pro- 
verbial expression.  "I  am  so  interior  to  Him  that  came  after 
me,  that  in  comparison  with  him,  I  am  like  the  humblest 
servant  compared  to  his  master."  To  be  not  fit  to  carry  a 
person's  shoes,  in  our  times,  is  a  well-known  proverb,  describing 
inferiority. 

28. — [These  things....done in  Bethahara.]     In  hot  countries  hke 

Palestine,  it  was  evidently  important  for  John  the  Baptist  to  be 
near  a  supply  of  water,  suited  to  the  baptism  of  the  multitudes 
who  came  to  him.     If  Beth-barah,  spoken  of  in  Gideon's  history 


54  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

is  the  same  place,  it  is  worthy  of  notice  that  it  is  specially 
mentioned  as  near  "  waters.''  (Judges  vii.  24.) 

The  name  of  the  place  ought  always  to  be  dear  to  the  hearts 
of  Christians.  It  is  the  place  where  the  first  disciples  of  Jesus 
were  made,  and  the  foundation  of  the  Christian  church  was  laid. 
It  was  here,  "  the  next  day,"  that  Jesus  was  publicly  proclaimed 
as  the  "Lamb  of  God."  It  was  here,  ''the  day  after,"  that 
Andrew  and  another  disciple  followed  Jesus.  Here  then  the 
Church  of  Christ,  properly  so  called,  began. 

In  leaving  this  passage,  let  us  remember  that  John  the 
Baptist's  ministry  left  the  Jews  entirely  without  excuse,  when 
afterwards  they  refused  to  believe  on  Christ.  They  could  never 
plead  that  our  Lord's  ministry  came  on  them  unawares  and 
took  them  by  surprise.  The  whole  nation  dwelling  in  Pales- 
tine, from  the  great  ecclesiastical  council  down  to  the  humblest 
classes,  were  evidently  aroused  to  a  state  of  attention  by  John's 
doings. 


JOHN  L  29—34. 


29  The  next  day  John  seeth  Jesus 
coming  unto  him,  and  saith.  Behold 
the  Lamb  of  God,  which  taketh  away 
the  sin  of  the  world. 

33  This  is  he  of  whom  I  said,  After 
me  Cometh  a  man  which  is  preferred 
before  me :  for  he  was  before  me. 

31  And  I  knew  him  not:  but  that 
he  should  be  made  manifest  to  Israel, 
therefore  am  I  come  baptizing  with 
water. 

32  And  John  bare  record,  saying. 


I  saw  the  Spirit  descending  from 
heaven  like  a  dove,  and  it  abode  upon 
him. 

33  And  I  knew  him  not :  but  he 
that  sent  me  to  baptize  with  water, 
the  same  said  unto  me,  Upon  whom 
thou  shalt  see  the  Spirit  descending, 
and  remaining  on  him,  the  same  is 
he  which  baptizeth  with  the  Holy 
Ghost. 

34  And  I  saw,  and  bare  record 
that  this  is  the  Son  of  God. 


This  passage  contains  a  verse  which  ought  to  be  printed 
in  great  letters  -in  the  memory  of  every  reader  of  the 
Bible.  All  the  stars  in  heaven  are  bright  and  beautiful, 
and  yet  one  star  exceedeth  another  star  in  glory.  So  also 
all  texts  of  Scripture  are  inspired  and  profitable,  and  yet 
some  texts  are  richer  than  others.  Of  such  texts  the  first 
verse  before  us  is  preeminently  one.  Never  was  there  a 
fuller  testimony  borne  to  Christ  upon  earth,  than  that 
which  is  here  borne  by  John  the  Baptist. 


JOHN,    CHAP.   I.  55 

Let  us  notice,  firstly,  in  this  passage,  the  peculiar  name 
xjchich  John  the  Baptist  gives  to  Christ.  He  calls  Him 
*'  The  Lamb  of  God." 

This  name  did  not  merely  mean,  as  some  have  supposed, 
that  (/hrist  was  meek  and  gentle  as  a  lamb.  This  would 
be  truth  no  doubt,  but  only  a  very  small  portion  of  tho 
truth.  There  are  greater  things  here  than  this  !  It 
meant  that  Christ  was  the  great  sacrifice  for  sin,  who 
was  come  to  make  atonement  for  transgression  by  His 
own  death  upon  the  cross.  He  was  the  true  Lamb  Avhich 
Abraham  told  Isaac  at  Moriah  God  would  provide.  (Gen. 
xxii.  8.)  He  was  the  true  Lamb  to  which  every  morning 
and  evening  sacrifice  in  the  temple  had  daily  pointed.  He 
was  the  Lamb  of  which  Isaiah  had  prophesied,  that  He 
would  be  "  brought  to  the  slaughter."  (Isaiah  liii.  '7.) 
He  was  the  true  Lamb  of  which  the  passover  lamb  in 
Egypt  had  been  a  vivid  type.  In  short,  He  was  the  great 
propitiation  for  sin  which  God  had  covenanted  from  all 
eternity  to  send  into  the  world.     He  was  God's  Lamb. 

Let  us  take  heed  that  in  all  our  thoughts  of  Christ,  we 
first  think  of  Him  as  John  the  Baptist  here  represents 
Him.  Let  us  serve  him  faithfully  as  our  Master.  Let 
US  obey  Him  loyally  as  our  King.  Let  us  study  His 
teaching  as  our  Prophet.  Let  us  walk  diligently  after 
Him  as  our  Example.  Let  us  look  anxiously  for  Him  as 
our  coming  Redeemer  of  body  as  well  as  soul.  But  above 
all,  let  us  prize  Him  as  our  sacrifice,  and  rest  our  whole 
weight  on  His  death  as  an  atonement  for  sin.  Let  His 
blood  be  more  precious  in  our  eyes  every  year  we  live. 
Whatever  else  we  glory  in  about  Christ,  let  us  glory 
above  all  things  in  His  cross.  This  is  the  corner-stone, 
this  is  the  citadel,  this  is  the  rule  of  true  Christian 
theology.  We  know  nothing  rightly  about  Christ,  until 
we  see  him  with  John  the  Baptist's  eyes,  and  can  rejoice 
in  Him  as  "  the  Lamb  that  was  slain." 


56  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Let  us  notice,  secondly,  in  this  passage,  the  peculiar  work 
which  John  the  Baptist  describes  Christ  as  doing.  He 
says  that  "  he  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world." 

Christ  is  a  Saviour.  He  did  not  come  on  earth  to  be  a 
conqueror,  or  a  philosopher,  or  a  mere  teacher  of  morality. 
He  came  to  save  sinners.  He  came  to  do  that  which  man 
could  never  do  for  himself, — ^to  do  that  which  money  and 
learning  can  never  obtain, — to  do  that  which  is  essential  to 
man's  real  happiness, — He  came  to  "  take  away  sin." 

Christ  is  a  complete  Saviour.  He  "  taketh  away  sin." 
He  did  not  merely  make  vague  proclamations  of  pardon, 
mercy,  and  forgiveness.  He  "  took"  our  sins  upon  Him- 
self, and  carried  them  away.  He  allowed  them  to  be  laid 
upon  Himself,  and  "bore  them  in  His  own  body  on  the 
tree."  (l  Pet.  ii.  24.)  The  sins  of  every  one  that  believes 
on  Jesus  are  made  as  though  they  had  never  been  sinned 
at  all.     The  Lamb  of  God  has  taken  them  clean  away. 

Christ  is  an  almighty  Saviour,  and  a  Saviour  for  all  man- 
kind. He  "taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world."  He  did 
not  die  for  the  Jews  only,  but  for  the  Gentile  as  well  as  the 
Jew.  He  did  not  suffer  for  a  few  persons  only,  but  for  all 
mankind.  The  payment  that  He  made  on  the  cross  was 
more  than  enough  to  make  satisfaction  for  the  debts  of  all. 
The  blood  that  He  shed  was  precious  enough  to  wash  away 
the  sins  of  all.  His  atonement  on  the  cross  was  sufficient 
for  all  mankind,  though  efficient  only  to  them  that  believe. 
The  sin  that  He  took  up  and  bore  on  the  cross  was  the  sin 
of  the  whole  world. 

Last,  but  not  least,  Christ  is  a  perpetual  and  unwearied 
Saviour.  He  "  taketh  away  "  sin.  He  is  daily  taking  it 
away  from  every  one  that  believes  on  Him, — daily  purging, 
daily  cleansing,  daily  washing  the  souls  of  His  people,  daily 
granting  and  applying  fresh  supplies  of  mercy.  He  did 
not  cease  to  work  for  His  saints,  when  He  died  for  them  on 
the  cross.     He  lives  in  heaven  as  a  Priest,  to  present  His 


57 

sacrifice  continually  before  God.  In  grace  as  well  as  in 
providence,  Christ  workethi  still.  He  is  ever  taking  away 
sin. 

These  are  golden  truths  indeed.  Well  would  it  be  for 
the  Church  of  Christ,  if  they  were  used  by  all  who  know 
them !  Our  very  familiarity  with  texts  like  these  is  one  of 
our  greatest  dangers.  Blessed  are  they  who  not  only  keep 
this  text  in  their  memories,  but  feed  upon  it  in  their  hearts ! 

Let  us  notice,  lastly,  in  this  passage,  the  peculiar  office 
which  John  the  Baptist  attributes  to  Christ.  He  speaks 
of  Him  as  Him  "  which  baptizeth  with  the  Holy  Ghost." 

The  baptism  here  spoken  of  is  not  the  baptism  of  water. 
It  does  not  consist  either  of  dipping  or  sprinkling.  It  does 
not  belong  exclusively  either  to  infants  or  to  grown  up 
people.  It  is  not  a  baptism  which  any  man  can  give,  Epis- 
copalian or  Presbyterian,  Independent  or  Methodist,  lay- 
man or  minister.  It  is  a  baptism  which  the  great  Head  of 
the  Church  keeps  exclusively  in  His  own  hands.  It  consists 
of  the  implanting  of  grace  into  the  inward  man.  It  is  the 
same  thing  with  the  new  birth.  It  is  a  baptism,  not  of  the 
body,  but  of  the  heart.  It  is  a  baptism  which  the  penitent 
thief  received,  though  neither  dipped  nor  sprinkled  by  the 
hand  of  man.  It  is  a  baptism  which  Ananias  and  Sapphira 
did  not  receive,  though  admitted  into  church-communion 
by  apostolic  men. 

Let  it  be  a  settled  principle  in  our  religion  that  the  bap- 
tism of  which  John  the  Baptist  speaks  here,  is  the  baptism 
which  is  absolutely  necessary  to  salvation.  It  is  well  to  be 
baptized  into  the  visible  Church  ;  but  it  is  far  better  to  be 
ba^)tized  into  that  Church  which  is  made  up  of  true  believ- 
ers. The  baptism  of  water  is  a  most  blessed  and  profitable 
ordinance,  and  cannot  be  neglected  without  great  sin.  But 
the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  of  far  greater  importance. 
The  man  who  dies  with  his  heart  not  baptized  by  Christ 
can  never  be  saved. 

S* 


68  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS.     • 

Let  us  ask  ourselves,  as  we  leave  this  passage,  "Whether 
we  are  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  whether  we 
have  any  real  interest  in  the  Lamb  of  God?  Thousands, 
unhappily,  are  wasting  their  time  in  controversy  about 
water  baptism,  and  neglecting  the  baptism  of  the  heart 
Thousands  more  are  content  with  a  head-knowledge  of  the 
Lamb  of  God,  or  have  never  sought  Him  by  faith,  that 
their  own  sins  may  be  actually  taken  away.  Let  us  take 
heed  that  we  ourselves  have  new  hearts,  and  believe  to  the 
saving  of  our  souls. 

Notes.     John  I  29—34. 

29. — [The  next  day.]  This  means  the  day  after  the  conversation 
between  John  the  Baptist  and  the  deputation  of  priests  and  Le- 
vites.  The  careful  marking  of  days  by  St.  John  at  this  stage  of 
his  gospel  deserves  particular  notice. 

[Seeth  Jesus  coming  unto  him.]  These  words  seem  to  prove 
that  Jesus  was  not  present  on  the  preceding  day,  during  the 
conversation  with  the  priests  and  Levites,  and  that  John's  words, 
''standeth  among  you,"  cannot  be  Hterally  taken. 

It  seems  probable,  as  before  observed,  that  our  Lord  came 
back  to  John  after  His  temptation  in  the  wilderness.  The  Spirit 
took  Him  into  the  wilderness  "immediately"  after  His  baptism, 
(Mark  i.  12,)  and  it  was  upon  His  return,  at  the  end  of  forty  days, 
that  John  the  Baptist  saw  him  again. 

[And  saithj  iehold.]  This  appears  to  have  been  a  public,  open, 
proclamation  made  by  John  to  his  disciples  and  the  multitude 
who  surrounded  him.  "Behold  that  person  who  is  coming 
towards  us.  He  is  the  Lamb  of  Grod,  the  Messiah  of  whom  I 
have  been  preaching  to  you,  and  on  whom  I  have  told  you  to 
believe." 

[The  Lamb  of  Ood^  There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that 
John  gave  this  name  to  our  Lord  because  He  was  the  true  sacri- 
fice for  sin,  the  true  antitype  of  the  passover  lamb,  and  the  lamb 
prophesied  of  by  Isaiah.  (Is.  liii.  7.)  The  idea  that  he  only 
refers  to  the  quietness  and  meekness  of  our  Lord's  personal 
character  is  utterly  unsatisfactory.  He  is  describing  our  Lord's 
official  character  as  the  great  propitiation  for  sin. 

The  expression,  "  Lamb  of  God,"  according  to  some,  signifies 
"  that  eminent,  great,  divine,  and  most  excellent  Lamb."  It  is  a 
well-known  Hebraism  to  describe  anything  very  great  as  a  thing 


59 

"  of  God."  Thus  we  read  of  "  thunderings  of  Grod,"  and 
"trembling  of  God,"  (Exod.  ix.  28;  1  Sam.  xiv.  15.) — According 
to  others  i  signifies  the  Lamb  which  God  has  provided  from  all 
eternity,  and  which  God  has  long  covenanted  and  promised  to 
send  into  the  world  to  be  slain  for  sinners.  Both  views  make 
good  doctrine,  but  the  second  seems  the  preferable  one. 

Bengel  thinks  that  John  called  our  Lord  "the  Lamb  of  God," 
with  a  special  reference  to  the  Passover,  which  was  then  near. 
(John  ii.  13.)  He  also  sees  a  parallel  between  the  expression 
"  Lamb  of  God,"  and  the  phrase.  "  sacrifice  of  God,"  (Psalm  li. 
17,)  which  means  "  the  sacrifice  which  God  acknowledges  as 
pleasing  to  Him." 

Chemnitius  thinks,  in  addition  to  other  reasons  why  John 
calls  our  Lord  "  the  Lamb,"  that  he  desired  to  show  that  Christ's 
kingdom  was  not  pohtical.  He  was  neither  the  ram  nor  the 
he-goat  described  in  Daniel.  (Dan.  viii.  20.) 

[Taketh  away.]  The  Greek  word  so  rendered,  is  given  in  the 
marginal  reading,  "  beareth."  Both  ideas  are  included.  It  means 
"  taketh  away  by  his  expiatory  death."  The  Lamb  of  God  "  bear- 
eth "  the  sin  of  the  world  by  taking  it  upon  Himself  He 
allowed  our  guilt  to  be  laid  upon  Him,  and  carried  it  away  like 
the  scapegoat,  so  that  there  was  none  left.  It  is  one  of  the 
many  expressions  which  describe  the  great  Scripture  truth,  that 
Christ's  death  was  a  vicarious  sacrifice  for  sin.  He  became  our 
substitute.  He  took  upon  Him  our  sin.  He  was  made  sin  for 
us.  Our  sins  were  imputed  to  Him.  He  was  made  a  curse  for 
us. 

The  word  here  rendered  "  taketh  away  "  is  found  at  least  100 
times  in  the  New  Testament.  In  82  places  it  is  rendered,  "  take," 
— "  take  up," — or  "  take  away."  In  5  places  it  is,  "  bear."  In  4 
it  is,  "lift  up."  In  2  it  is,  "  remove."  In  most  of  the  other  places 
it  is  the  imperative  expression,  "away  with  !"  All  point  to  the 
same  view  of  the  text  before  us,  viz.,  "  a  complete  atonement  for 
sin." 

The  use  of  the  present  tense,  "  taketh  away,"  is  remarked  by 
all  the  best  commentators,  ancient  and  modern.  It  is  intended 
to  show  the  completeness  of  Christ's  satisfaction  for  sin,  and 
the  continual  application  of  His  once-made  sacrifice.  He  is 
always  taking  sin  away.  RoUock  observes,  "  The  influence  of 
Christ's  sacrifice  is  perpetual,  and  His  blood  never  dries  up." 

The  idea  maintained  by  some,  that  "taking  away  sin,"  in  this 
place,  includes  sanctification  as  well  as  justification,  seems  to  me 
quite  untenable.  That  Christ  "  takes  away  "  the  power  of  a 
believ<ir's  sins,  when  He  applies  His  redemption  to  his  soul,  is  no 
doubt  true.     But  it  is  not  the  truth  of  this  text. 


60  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

[The  sin.]  Let  it  be  noted  that  the  singular  number  is  used 
here.  It  is  ''  the  sin,"  not  "  the  sins."  The  expression  seems  to 
me  purposely  intended  to  show  that  what  Christ  took  away,  and 
bore  on  the  cross,  was  not  the  sin  of  certain  people  only,  but  the 
whole  accumulated  mass  of  all  the  sins  of  all  the  children  of 
Adam.  He  bore  the  weight  of  all,  and  made  an  atonement 
sufl&cient  to  make  satisfaction  for  all. 

The  idea  propounded  by  some,  that  "the  sin  "  which  Christ  is 
said  here  to  take  away,  is  only  man's  original  sin, — and  that  for 
man's  actual  sins  each  man  must  make  satisfaction  himself,  ia 
destitute  of  the  slightest  foundation  in  Scripture,  contradicts 
scores  of  plain  texts,  and  utterly  overthrows  the  whole  Gospel. 

[Of  the  world.]  It  is  almost  needless  to  say  that  there  are 
two  views  of  this  expression.  Some  say,  that  it  only  means, 
that  Christ  takes  away  the  sins  of  G-entiles  as  well  as  Jews,  and 
that  it  does  not  mean  the  sin  of  any  but  the  elect.  Others  say, 
that  it  really  means  that  Christ  "taketh  away"  the  sin  of  all 
mankind,  that  is,  that  He  made  an  atonement  sufficient  for  all, 
and  that  all  are  salvalle,  though  not  all  saved,  in  consequence  of 
His  death. 

I  decidedly  prefer  the  latter  of  these  two  views.  I  hold  as 
strongly  as  any  one,  that  Christ's  death  is  profitable  to  none  but 
to  the  elect  who  believe  on  His  name.  But  I  dare  not  limit  and 
pare  down  such  expressions  as  the  one  before  us.  I  dare  not 
say  that  no  atonement  has  been  made,  in  any  sense,  except  for 
the  elect.  I  beheve  it  is  possible  to  be  more  systematic  than  the 
Bible  in  our  statements.  When  I  read  that  the  wicked  who  are 
lost,  "  deny  the  Lord  that  bought  them,"  (2  Peter  ii.  1,)  and  that 
"  God  was  in  Christ,  reconcihng  the  world  unto  himself,"  (2  Cor. 
V.  19,)  I  dare  not  confine  the  intention  of  redemption  to  the 
saints  alone.     Christ  is  for  every  man. 

I  am  aware  the  objection  is  often  made,  that  "if  Christ  taketh 
away  the  sin  of  the  world,  and  yet  the  vast  majority  of  men  die 
in  their  sins  and  are  lost,  Christ's  work  for  many  was  wrought 
in  vain."  I  see  no  force  in  this  objection.  I  think  we  might  as 
well  argue,  that  because  sin  came  into  the  world  and  marred 
creation,  creation  was  in  vain.  We  are  not  talking  of  the  works 
of  men,  but  of  the  eternal  Word,  and  we  must  be  content  to  see 
much  in  His  works  that  we  do  not  entirely  understand.  Though 
multitudes  are  lost,  I  have  no  doubt  the  last  day  will  prove  that 
nothing  that  Christ  did  for  them  was  in  vain. 

I  rest  in  the  view  of  the  text,  that  in  some  ineffable  and  inscru- 
table way,  the  whole  world's  sin  was  borne  and  atoned  for  by 
Christ.  "  He  taketh  away,  or  makes  atoriement  for,  the  sin  cf 
all  the  men  and  women  in  the  world."  I  have  no  doubt,  from 
Scripture,  that  the  vast  majority  of  "  the  world's  "  inhabitants  will 


JOHN,    CHAP.   I.  61 

be  found  at  last  to  have  received  no  benefit  from  Christ,  and  to 
have  died  in  their  sin?.  I  repudiate  the  idea  of  universal  salva- 
tion, as  a  dangerous  heresy,  and  utterly  contrary  to  Scripture. — 
But  ihe  lost  will  not  prove  to  be  lost  because  Christ  did  nothing 
for  them.  He  bore  their  sins.  He  carried  their  transgressions. 
He  provided  payment,  but  they  would  not  put  in  their  claim  to 
any  interest  in  it.  He  set  the  prison  door  open  to  all;  but  the 
majority  would  not  come  out  and  be  free.  In  the  w^ork  of  the 
Father  in  election,  and  of  the  spirit  in  conversion,  I  see  limita- 
tion m  the  Bible  most  clearly.  But  in  the  work  of  Christ  in 
atonement  I  see  no  limitation.  The  atonement  was  made  for  all 
the  world,  though  it  is  applied  to  and  enjoyed  by  none  but  be- 
lievers.— Christ's  intercession  is  the  peculiar  privilege  of  His 
people.  But  Christ's  atonement  is  a  benefit  which  is  ojBfered 
freely  and  honestly  to  all  mankind. 

In  saying  all  this  I  am  fully  aware  that  the  word  ^'  world  "  is 
sometimes  used  in  a  qualified  sense,  and  must  be  interpreted 
with  some  limitation.  When  it  is  said,  "  The  world  knew  him 
not,"  (John  i.  10,)  it  cannot  mean  that  not  a  single  person  in  the 
world  knew  Him.  Bat  in  the  text  before  us  I  see  no  necessity 
for  limitation.  I  see  the  whole  mass  of  mankind's  guilt  brought 
together  in  one  singular  word,  "  the  sin  of  the  world,"  and  that 
sin,  I  am  told,  Christ  ''  taketh  away."  And  I  believe  the  true 
meaning  to  be,  that  the  Lamb  of  God  has  made  atonement 
sufficient  for  all  mankind,  though  efficient  unquestionably  to  none 
but  believers. 

Augustine  remarks,  "  How  weighty  must  be  the  blood  of  the 
Lamb,  by  whom  the  world  was  made,  to  turn  the  scale  when 
weighed  against  the  world!" 

Calvin,  in  his  commentary  on  this  verse,  says,  '  John  uses  the 
word  sin  in  the  singular  number  for  any  kind  of  iniquity ;  as  if 
he  had  said  that  every  kind  of  unrighteousness  which  alienates 
men  from  God  is  taken  away  by  Christ.  And  when  he  says  '  The 
sin  of  the  world,'  he  extends  this  favour  indiscriminately  to  the 
whole  human  race,  that  the  Jews  might  not  think  that  He  had 
been  sent  to  them  alone.  Hence  we  infer  that  the  whole  world 
is  involved  in  the  same  condemnation ;  and  that  as  all  men, 
without  exception,  are  guilty  of  unrighteousness  before  God, 
they  need  to  be  reconciled  to  Him.  John  the  Baptist,  by  speak- 
ing generally  of  the  sin  of  the  world,  intended  to  impress  upon 
us  the  conviction  of  our  own  misery,  and  to  exhort  us  to  seek 
the  remedy.  Now  our  duty  is  to  embrace  the  benefit  which  is 
offered  to  all,  that  each  of  us  may  be  convinced  that  there  is 
nothing  to  hinder  him  from  obtaining  reconciliation  in  Christ, 
provided  that  he  comes  to  Him  by  the  guidance  of  f  lith." 

Brentius  says,    "Although  all  the  men  in  the  world  do  not 


62  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

receive  the  benefit  of  Christ's  passion,  because  all  do  not  believ<! 
on  Christ,  yet  that  benefit  is  so  offered  to  the  whole  woild,  that 
whosoever,  whether  circumcised  or  uncircumcised,  king  or  peas- 
ant, high  or  low,  rich  or  poor,  sick  or  well,  old  or  youn^-,  receive- 
Christ  by  faith,  is  justified  before  God,  and  saved  with  an  eternal 
salvation." 

Muscnlus  says,  "  John  places  before  us  no  one  particular  person 
whose  sins  the  Lamb  has  come  to  take  away;  but  under  the 
expression  '  the  world,'  he  comprehends  the  whole  race  of  mortals 
from  the  very  beginning  of  the  world  to  the  end  of  it." 

Melancthon  says,  "  lie  taketh  away  the  sin,  that  is  the  univer- 
sal condemnation,  of  the  human  race." 

Chemnitius  says,  "John  affirms  that  the  benefits  of  Christ 
belong  not  to  the  Jews  only,  but  to  the  whole  world,  and  that 
no  one  who  is  in  the  world  is  excluded  from  them,  if  he  is  only 
wilhng  to  receive  them  by  faith." 

The  deep  spiritual  knowledge  exhibited  by  John  the  Baptist 
in  this  verse,  ought  not  to  be  overlooked.  Such  a  sentence  as 
the  one  before  us  never  fell  from  the  lips  of  any  other  disciple  of 
Christ  before  the  day  of  Pentecost.  Others  could  say  that  our 
Lord  was  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of 
David,  the  King  of  Israel,  the  Son  of  the  Blessed,  who  was  to 
come  into  the  world.  But  none  seem  to  have  seen  so  clearly  as 
John  that  Christ  was  the  sacrifice  for  sin,  the  Lamb  that  was  to 
be  slain.  Weh  would  it  be  for  the  Church  of  Christ  in  the 
nineteenth  century,  if  all  its  ministers  possessed  as  much  know- 
ledge of  Christ's  atonement  as  is  here  shown  by  John  the 
Baptist  1  John  saw  the  vicarious  sacrifice  of  Christ,  before  He 
died  on  the  cross.  Many  so-called  Christians  cannot  see  Christ's 
vicarious  sacrifice  even  at  this  day ! 

30. — [This  is  he  of  whom  I  said.]  These  words  appear  to  have  been 
spoken  in  our  Lord's  presence,  and  to  have  been  specially 
intended  to  point  the  multitude  to  Him.  "This  person  before 
you  is  He  of  whom  I  have  repeatedly  spoken  in  my  ministry,  as 
the  coming  One  who  is  far  greater  than  myself.  You  see  Him 
now  before  you." 

[A  man.Jie  was  before  me.]  '  The  human  and  divine  natures 
of  our  Lord  are  here  brought  together  by  John  in  one  sentence, 
"He  of  whom  I  spake  to  you  is  a  man,  and  yet  at  the  same  time 
He  is  One  who  was  before  rae,  because  He  has  existed  from  all 
eternity." 

31. — [/  knew  him  not]  This  means  "I  was  not  acquainted  with 
Him  in  time  past.  There  has  been  no  private  collusion  or 
arrangement  between  Him  and  me.     I  did  not  even  know  Him 


JOHN,    CHAP.   I.  68 

by  sight  until  the  day  when  He  came  to  be  baptized."  The 
difficulty  connected  with  these  words  of  John  will  be  considered 
fwlly  at  the  33d  verse. 

[That  he  should  he  made  manifest  to  Israd^  t&c]  John  here 
declares  that  the  great  end  of  his  ministry  was,  that  this  wonder- 
ful Person,  whom  he  had  just  pointed  out,  should  be  manifested 
and  made  known  to  the  Jews.  He  did  not  come  to  form  a  party 
of  his  own,  or  to  baptize  in  his  own  namr^.  The  whole  object  of 
his  preaching  and  baptizing  was  now  betore  his  hearers,  it  was 
simply  to  make  known  to  Israel  the  Mighty  One,  the  Lamb  of 
God,  whom  they  now  saw. 

32. — [And  John  hare  record^  These  words  seem  to  denote  a  pubhc 
and  solemn  testimony  borne  by  John  to  the  fact,  that  our  Lord 
had  been  visibly  acknowledged  by  God  the  Father  as  the  Messiah. 
If  his  hearers  would  have  further  proof  that  this  Person,  to 
whom  he  was  pointing  them,  was  really  the  Christ,  he  would  tell 
them  what  he  had  seen  with  his  own  eyes.  He  would  bear 
witness  that  he  had  seen  visible  proofs  that  this  Person  was  really 
the  Messiah. 

[/saw.]  This  means,  "At  the  time  when  our  Lord  was 
baptized,  I  saw  this  heavenly  vision."  Whether  any  beside  John 
saw  this  vision,  and  heard  the  voice  of  the  Father,  which  accom- 
panied it,  may  well  be  doubted.  At  any  rate,  if  they  did,  they 
did  not  understand  either  what  they  saw  or  heard. 

[The  Spirit  descending^  &c'\  This  means  that  John  saw 
something  coming  down  from  heaven  after  the  manner  of  a  dove 
flying  downwards,  and  that  what  he  saw  was  the  Holy  Spirit, 
graciously  revealing  Himself  in  a  visible  manner. 

[It  abode  upon  him.]  This  means  that  the  heavenly  vision  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  rested  upon  Christ  at  the  time  of  His  baptism. 
It  lighted  down  upon  Him  as  a  dove  would  settle  down,  and  did 
not  leave  Him. 

I  cannot  satisfy  myself  that  the  expression  "  like  a  dove  "  in 
this  verse,  means  that  any  dove  was  really  seen  by  John,  when 
our  Lord  was  baptized.  All  the  four  Gospel-writers  describe  an 
appearance  "like  a  dove."  St.  Luke  distinctly  speaks  of  "a 
bodily  shape."  That  something  visible  was  seen  by  John  is 
plain,  and  that  its  appearance  descending  on  our  Lord,  resembled 
tlie  downward  flight  of  a  dove,  is  also  plain.  But  I  am  unable 
to  see  that  the  Holy  Ghost  took  upon  Him  the  actual  form  of  a 
dove. 

Some  think,  as  Augustine,  that  the  likeness  to  a  dove  was 
especially  employed  at  this  time,  to  answer  the  figure  of  Noah's 
flood.     He  says,  "  As  a  dove  did  at  that  time  bring  tidings  of  the 


64  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

abating  of  the  water,  so  doth  it  now  of  the  abating  of  the  wrath 
of  God,  upon  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel." 

We  must  beware  of  supposing  for  a  moment,  that  this  vision 
of  the  Spirit  descending  was  meant  to  imply,  that  our  Lord 
first  received  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost  at  that  particular  time, 
or  that  He  had  not  received  it  before  in  the  same  degree.  We 
must  not  doubt  that  the  Holy  Ghost  dwelt  in  Jesus  "  without 
measure  "  from  the  very  time  of  His  incarnation.  The  vision 
was  meant  to  show  the  Church,  that  when  Christ's  ministry 
began,  a  fuUer  revelation  of  all  Three  Persons  in  the  Trinity  was 
made  at  once  to  mankind.  It  was  meant  at  the  same  time  to  be 
a  formal  testimony  to  John  the  Baptist  that  the  Messiah  was 
before  him, — that  this  was  the  promised  Saviour  whom  God  had 
anointed  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  sent  into  the  world, ^-that 
the  time  of  Christ's  ministry  had  begun, — that  He  who  had  the 
Spirit  to  bestow  on  men  was  before  him, — and  that  His  entrance 
on  His  public  work  was  attested  by  the  presence  both  of  the 
Father  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  in  short,  by  a  manifestation  of  all 
three  Persons  in  the  Trinity  at  one  time. 

As  a  Levite,  John  doubtless  was  familiar  with  all  the  ceremo- 
nies by  which  the  Jewish  high  priests  and  kings  were  solemnly 
inducted  into  their  office.  For  his  satisfaction,  therefore,  our 
Lord  received  visible  attestation  from  heaven,  and  was  pubhcly 
recognized  as  the  Messiah,  the  anointed  Priest,  and  King,  and 
Prophet,  before  his  forerunner's  eyes. 

Musculus  on  this  verse  remarks,  "  The  Spirit  did  not  descend 
on  Christ's  account,  who  was  never  separate,  either  from  the 
Holy  Spirit  or  fi  om  the  Father, — but  oa  our  account,  that  He 
who  came  to  redeem  the  world,  might  be  made  manifest,  through 
John's  declaration  of  Him." 

3Z. — [I knew  himnot]  The  Greek  word  so  rendered,  both  here 
and  in  the  31st  verse,  is  hterally,  "I  had  not  known  him." 
There  is  a  difficulty  connected  with  the  expression  which 
demands  explanation.  St.  Matthew  tells  us,  that  when  our 
Lord  came  to  John  to  be  baptized,  John  said  to  him,  "  I  have 
need  to  be  baptized  of  thee,  and  comest  thou  to  me?"  (Mait. 
iii.  14,)  showing  plainly  by  these  words  that  he  knew  He  was 
before  him.  And  yet  here  we  find  John  saying,  "  I  knew  him 
not."     How  can  this  apparent  inconsistency  be  reconciled  ? 

Some  think,  as  Chrysostom,  that  "  John  is  speaking  of  former 
times,  and  not  of  the  times  near  to  his  baptism." 

Some  think,  as  Augustine,  that  it  means,  ''  I  had  not  known 
till  that  day  that  Jesus  would  baptize  with  the  Holy  Ghost, 
although  I  had  long  known  him  porsoaaUy,  and  had  recognized 
him  as  the  Christ  of  God.     But  when  He  came  to  be  baptized, 


JOHN     CHAP.    I.  6c 

it  was  also  revealed  to  me,  that  He  would  confer  on  men  the 
great  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

Some  think,  as  Brentiu^  and  Beza,  that  it  means,  "  I  had  not 
known  Jesus  by  sight  until  the  day  when  He  came  to  be  bap- 
tized. I  knew  that  He  had  been  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  but 
was  not  personally  acquainted  with  Him,  having  been  myself 
brought  up  '  in  the  desert.'  (Luke  i.  80.)  I  had  only  been  told 
by  Him  who  senrt  me  to  baptize,  that  whenever  the  Messiah 
came  to  be  baptized,  I  should  recognize  Him  by  the  descent  of 
the  Holy  Ghost.  When  He  did  come,  I  received  a  secret  reve- 
lation from  God  that  Messiah  stood  before  me,  and  under  the 
power  of  that  feeling  I  confessed  my  unworthiness  to  baptize 
Him.  But  when,  at  last  I  did  baptize  Him,  I  received  a  full  con- 
firmation of  my  faith  by  beholding  the  promised  sign  of  the 
descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  Those  who  hold  this  view,  think 
the  case  of  Samuel  receiving  a  secret  revelation  about  Saul,  an 
illustration  of  the  matter.  (1  Sam.  ix.  15.) 

Some  think,  as  Poole,  that  it  means,  "  I  knew  him  not  per- 
fectly and  distinctly,  though  I  had  an  impression  when  I  first 
saw  Him  coming  to  be  baptized,  that  He  was  One  far  greater 
than  myself,  and  under  that  impression  demurred  to  baptizing 
Him.     After  His  baptism  I  saw  clearly  who  He  was." 

The  last  explanation  is  perhaps  the  simplest,  and  most  proba- 
ble. That  John  at  one  time  did  not  know  our  Lord  by  sight  at 
all,  that  he  afterwards  knew  Him  imperfectly,  and  that  his  per- 
fect knowledge  of  Him,  His  nature,  ofl&ce,  and  work,  was  not 
attained  till  the  time  when  the  Spirit  descended  at  His  baptism, 
are  points  that  seem  clear.  The  time  when  he  said,  "  I  have 
need  to  be  baptized  of  thee,"  would  seem  to  be  the  time  of  im- 
perfect knowledge,  when  the  fact  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah 
began  to  dawn  upon  him,  and  made  him  cry  out,  ''  comest  thou 
to  me  ?" 

Chrysostom  observes,  that  the  expression  is  a  proof  ''  that  the 
miracles  which  they  say  belong  to  Christ's  childhood  are  false, 
and  the  invention  of  those  who  bring  them  to  notice.  For  if 
He  had  begun  from  His  early  age  to  work  miracles,  neither 
could  John  have  been  ignorant  of  Him,  nor  would  the  multitude 
have  needed  a  teacher  to  make  Him  known." 

[He  that  sent  ine...same  saidi]  This  expression  indicates  that 
John  the  Baptist  had  many  special  revelations  of  God  concern- 
ing His  work,  of  which  we  have  no  record  given  to  us.  He 
seems  to  have  been  taught  and  instructed  like  one  of  the  old 
prophets. 

[He  which  haptizeth  loith   ihe  Holy   Ghost]     The  remarkable 


66  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

description  of  our  Lord,  here  given  by  John  the  Baptist,  has 
received  three  very  different  interpretations. 

Some  think  that  it  means,  "  Tliis  is  He  who  shall  institute 
Christian  baptism,  with  which  the  gift  of  tl^e  Holy  Ghost  shall 
be  connected.  His  baptism  shall  be  like  mine,  a  baptism  of 
water.  But  it  shall  not  be  a  baptism  of  water  only,  as  mine  is, 
but  a  baptism  accompanied  by  the  regenerating  grace  of  the 
Spirit." 

Some  think  that  it  means,  "  This  is  He  who  shall  baptize  with 
the  Holy  G-host  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  and  confer  miraculous 
gifts  on  the  church." 

Some  think  it  means,  "This  is  He  who  shall  baptize  the 
hearts  of  men,  which  neither  thou  canst  do  nor  any  other  human 
minister.  He  has  the  prerogative  of  giving  spiritual  life.  He 
is  the  giver  of-  the  Holy  Spirit  to  all  who  believe  on  Him." 

I  am  decidedly  of  opinion  that  this  third  view  is  the  correct 
one.  It  is  the  only  one  which  seems  at  all  answerable  to  the 
majesty  of  the  person  spoken  of,  the  dignity  of  the  speaker,  and 
the  solemnity  of  the  occasion. — To  say,  "This  is  He  who  shall 
institute  Christian  baptism "  seems  a  very  lame  and  impotent 
account  of  the  expression. — To  say,  "  This  is  He  who  shall 
bestow  miraculous  gifts  at  the  day  of  Pentecost,"  is  a  degree 
better,  but  gives  a  picture  of  our  Lord's  office  confined  to  a 
single  generation. — But  to  say,  "  This  is  He  who,  in  every  age 
of  the  church,  will  baptize  the  hearts  of  his  people  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  by  this  baptism  continually  replenish  the  ranks  of 
His  mystical  i3ody,"  is  saying  that  which  exactly  suits  the  occa- 
sion, and  describes  our  Lord's  work  in  the  world  in  a  worthy 
manner. 

Musculus,  on  this  verse,  remarks,  "  What  is  it  to  baptize  with 
the  Holy  Ghost  ?  It  is  to  regenerate  the  hearts  of  the  elect, 
and  consecrate  them  into  the  fellowship  of  the  sons  of  God." 
Again,  he  says,  "It  is  Christ  alone  who  baptizes  with  the  Holy 
Ghost,  a  power  which,  as  divine,  He  keeps  in  His  own  hands 
and  never  communicates  to  any  minister." 

The  view  T  have  maintained  is  ably  set  forth  in  Bucer's  com- 
mentary on  this  place.  He  s-ays,  "  By  the  baptism  of  water  Ave 
arc  received  into  the  outward  Church  of  God ;  by  the  baptism 
of  the  Spirit  into  the  inward  Church."  The  opinion  of  one  who 
Wivs  Regius  Professor  of  Divinity  at  Cambridge,  in  the  reign  of 
Edward  the  Sixth,  and  the  personal  friend  and  adviser  of  Cran- 
mer  and  the  other  English  reformers,  deserves  much  considera- 
tion. It  proves,  at  any  rate,  that  the  doctrine  of  inward  baptism 
of  the  Spirit,  which  Christ  alone  gives  to  every  beUever,  and  the 
identity  of  this  baptism  with  conversion  or  new  birth,  are  not 


JOH^^    CHAP.    I. 


67 


Ruch  modern   and  contemptible  notions  as   some   persons  are 
pleased  to  think. 

The  untenableness  of  the  view,  held  by  many,  that  John's 
baptism  was  not  the  same  as  Christian  bap' ism,  to  all  intents 
and  purposes,  is  ably  shown  by  Lin^htfoot,  in  his  Harmony  of  the 
Four  Evangelists.  If  it  was  not  Christian  baptism,  it  would  be 
hard  to  prove  that  some  of  the  disciples  ever  received  Chris- 
tian baptism  at  all.  There  is  not  the  slightest  evidence  that 
Andrew,  Peter,  and  Philip  were  baptized  by  Jesus. 

The  familiarity  which  John  displays  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and 
his  work,  deserves  particular  attention.  To  say,  as  many  do, 
that  the  Holy  Grliost  was  not  known  until  the  day  of  Pentecost, 
is  saying  what  cannot  be  proved.  The  Holy  Grhost  has  always 
been  in  the  hearts  of  believers  in  every  age  of  the  world.  His 
abundant  outpouring  is  undoubtedly  a  leading  mark  of  the  days 
since  Christ  came  into  the  world.  But  the  Holy  Ghost  was  ever 
in  God's  elect,  and  without  Him  there  never  was  a  soul  saved. 
34. — [/  saw  and  hare  record,  dx.]  This  means,  "  I  saw  perfectly, 
and  from  that  time  have  distinctly  and  unhesitatingly  testified 
that  the  person  whom  you  now  see  before  you  is  the  Christ,  the 
Son  of  the  living  God.  From  the  day  of  His  baptism  I  have 
been  fully  convinced  that  this  is  the  Messiah." 

John  here  declares  his  own  firm  conviction  of  our  Lord's 
divinity  and  eternal  generation.  He  w^as  satisfied  that  our  Lord 
was  not  the  son  of  Mary  only,  but  the  Son  of  God. 


JOHN  L  35—42. 


35  Again  the  next  day  after 
John  stood,  and  two  of  his  disci- 
ples; 

36  And  looking  upon  Jesus  as 
he  walked,  he  saith,  Behold  the 
Lamb  of  Gk)dl 

3*7  And  the  two  disciples  heard 
him  speak,  and  they  followed 
Jesus. 

38  Then  Jesus  turned,  and  saw 
them  following,  and  salth  unto 
them.  What  seek  ye?  They  said 
unto  him.  Rabbi,  (which  is  to  say, 
being  interpreted,  Master,)  where 
dwellest  thou? 

39  He  saith  unto  them,  Come 
ani    see.     They    came    and    saw 


where  he  dwelt,  and  abode  with 
him  that  day,  for  it  was  about  the 
tenth  hour. 

40  One  of  the  two  which  heara 
John  speak,  and  followed  him,  waa 
Andrew,  Simon  Peter's  brother. 

41  He  first  findeth  his  own 
brother  Simon,  and  saith  unto  him, 
We  have  found  the  Messias,  which 
is,  being  interpreted,  the  Christ. 

42  And  he  brought  him  to  Je- 
sus. And  when  Jesus  beheld  him, 
he  said.  Thou  art  Simon  the  son 
of  Jona :  thou  shalt  be  called  Ce- 
phas, which  is  by  interpretation,  A 
stone. 


68  ■  EXPOSITOKY  THOUGHTS. 

These  verses  ought  always  to  be  interesting  to  every  true 
Christian.  They  describe  the  first  beginnings  of  the 
Christian  Church.  Yast  as  that  church  is  now,  there  was 
a  time  when  it  consisted  of  only  two  weak  raenibers.  The 
calling  of  those  two  members  is  described  in  the  passage 
which  is  now  before  our  eyes. 

We  see,  for  one  thing,  in  these  verses,  what  good  is  done 
hy  continually  testifying  of  Christ. 

The  first  time  that  John  the  Baptist  cried,  "  Behold  the 
Lamb  of  God,"  no  result  appears  to  have  followed.  We 
are  not  told  of  any  who  heard,  inquired,  and  believed. 
But  when  he  repeated  the  same  words  the  next  day,  we 
read  that  two  of  His  disciples  "heard  him  speak  and  fol- 
lowed Jesus."  They  were  received  most  graciously  by  Him 
whom  they  followed.  "They  came  and  saw  where  he 
dwelt,  and  abode  with  him  that  day."  Truly  it  was  a  day 
in  their  lives  most  eventful,  and  most  blessed  !  From  that 
day  they  became  fast  and  firm  disciples  of  the  new-found 
Messiah.  They  took  up  the  cross.  They  continued  with 
Him  in  His  temptations.  They  followed  Him  whitherso- 
ever He  went.  One  of  them  at  least,  if  not  both,  became 
a  chosen  apostle,  and  a  master  builder  in  the  Christian 
temple.  And  all  was  owing  to  John  the  Baptist's  testi- 
mony, "  Behold  the  lamb  of  God."  That  testimony  was  a 
little  seed.     But  it  bore  mighty  fruits. 

This  simple  story  is  a  pattern  of  the  way  in  which  good 
has  been  done  to  souls  in  every  age  of  the  Christian 
Church.  By  such  testimony  as  that  before  us,  and  by  none 
else,  men  and  women  are  converted  and  saved.  It  is  by 
exalting  Christ,  not  the  church, — Christ,  not  the  sacra- 
ments,— Christ,  not  the  ministry, — it  is  by  this  means  that 
hearts  are  moved,  and  sinners  are  turned  to  God.  To  the 
world  such  testimony  may  seem  weakness  and  foolishness. 
Yet,  like  the  ram's  horns,  before  whose  blast  the  walls  of 
Jericho  fell  down,  this  testimony  is  mighty  to  the  pulling 


69 

down  of  strongholds.  The  stoiy  of  the  crucified  Lamb  of 
God  has  proved  in  every  age,  the  power  of  God  unto  sal- 
vation. Those  who  have  done  most  for  Christ's  cause  in 
every  part  Df  the  world,  have  been  men  like  John  the 
Baptist.  They  have  not  cried,  Behold  me,  or  Behold  the 
church,  or  Behold  the  ordinances,  but  "  Behold  the  Lamb." 
If  souls  are  to  be  saved,  men  must  be  pointed  directly  t( 
Christ. 

One  thing,  however,  must  never  be  forgotten.  There 
must  be  patient  continuance  in  preaching  and  teaching  the 
truth,  if  we  want  good  to  be  done.  Christ  must  be  set 
forth  again  and  again,  as  the  "  Lamb  of  God  which  taketh 
away  the  sin  of  the  world."  The  story  of  grace  must  be 
told  repeatedly, — line  upon  line,  and  precept  upon  precept. 
It  is  the  constant  dropping  w^hich  wears  away  the  stone. 
The  promise  shall  never  be  broken,  that  "  God's  word  shall 
not  return  unto  him  void."  (Isai.  Iv.  11.)  But  it  is  nowhere 
said  that  it  shall  do  good  the  very  first  time  that  it  is 
preached.  It  was  not  the  first  proclamation  of  John  the 
Baptist,  but  the  second,  which  made  Andrew  and  his  com- 
panion follow  Jesus. 

We  see,  for  another  thing,  lohat  good  a  believer  may  do 
to  others^  by  speaking  to  them  about  Christ. 

No  sooner  does  Andrew  become  a  disciple,  than  he  tells 
iiis  brother  Simon  what  a  discovery  he  has  made.  Like 
one  who  has  unexpectedly  heard  good  tidings,  he  hastens 
to  impart  it  to  the  one  nearest  and  dearest  to  him.  He 
says- to  his  brother,  ""We  have  found  the  Messias,"  and 
he  "  brings  him  to  elesus."  Who  can  tell  what  might  have 
happened  if  Andrew  had  been  of  a  silent,  reserved,  and 
uncommunicative  spirit,  like  many  a  Christian  in  the 
present  day  ?  Who  can  tell  but  his  brother  might  Jiave 
lived  and  died  a  fisherman  on  the  Galilean  lake?  But 
happily  for  Simon,  Andrew  was  not  a  man  of  this  sort. 
He  was  one  whose  heart  was  so  full  that  he  must  speak. 


70  EXPOSITORS  THOUGHTS. 

And  to  Andrew's  out-spoken  testimony,  under  God,  the 
great  apostle  Peter  owed  the  first  beginning  of  light  in 
his  soul. 

The  fact  before  us  is  most  striking  and  instructive.  Out 
of  the  three  first  members  of  the  Chnstian  Church,  one  at 
least  was  brought  to  Jesus,  by  the  private,  quiet  word  of 
a  relative.  He  seems  to  have  heard  no  public  preaching. 
He  saw  no  mighty  miracle  wrought.  He  was  not  con- 
vinced by  any  powerful  reasoning.  He  only  heard  his 
brother  telling  him  that  he  had  found  a  Saviour  himself, 
and  at  once  the  work  began  in  his  soul.  The  simple  testi- 
mony of  a  warm-hearted  brother  was  the  first  link  in  the 
chain  by  which  Peter  was  drawn  out  of  the  world,  and 
joined  to  Christ.  The  first  blow  in  that  mighty  work  by 
which  Peter  was  made  a  pillar  of  the  Church,  was  struck 
by  Andrew's  words,  "  We  have  found  the  Christ." 

Well  would  it  be  for  the  Church  of  Christ,  if  all  believ 
ers  were  more  like  Andrew !  Well  would  it  be  for  souls 
if  all  men  and  women  who  have  been  converted  themselves, 
would  speak  to  their  friends  and  relatives  on  spiritual  sub- 
jects, and  tell  them  what  they  have  found!  How  much 
good  might  be  done  !  How  many  might  be  led  to  Jesus, 
who  now  live  and  die  in  unbelief!  The  work  of  testifying 
the  Gospel  of  the  grace  of  God  ought  not  to  be  left  to 
ministers  alone.  All  who  have  received  mercy  ought  to 
fijid  a  tongue,  and  to  declare  what  God  has  done  for  their 
souls.  All  who  have  been  delivered  from  the  power  of  the 
devil,  ought  to  "  go  home  and  tell  their  friends  what  great 
things  God  has  done  for  them."  (Mark  v.  19.)  Thousands, 
humanly  speaking,  would  listen  to  a  word  from  a  friend, 
who  will  not  listen  to  a  sermon.  Every  believer  ought  to 
be  a  home-missionary,  a  missionary  to  his  family,  children, 
servants,  neighbours,  and  friends.  Surely,  if  we  can  find 
nothing  to  say  to  others  about  Jesus,  we  may  well  doubt 
whether  we  are  savingly  acquainted  with  Him  ourselves. 


JOHN,    CHAP.    I.  71 

Let  us  take  heed  that  we  are  among  those  who  really 
follow  Christ,  and  abide  with  Him.  It  is  not  enough  to 
hear  Him  preached  from  the  pulpit,  and  to  read  of  Him  as 
described  in  books.  We  must  actually  follow  Him,  pour 
out  our  hearts  before  Him,  and  hold  personal  communion 
with  Him.  Then,  and  not  till  then,  we  shall  feel  con- 
strained to  speak  of  Him  to  others.  The  man  who  only 
knows  Christ  by  the  hearing  of  the  ear,  will  never  do  much 
for  the  spread  of  Christ's  cause  in  the  earth. 

Notes.     John  I.  35—42. 

35. — [The  next  day.]  Let  St.  John's  particularity  in  noting  days  at 
this  period  of  our  Lord's  history,  be  observed  again  in  this  verse. 
If,  as  many  suppose,  St.  John  was  one  of  the  two  who  this  day 
followed  Jesus  and  became  His  disciples,  we  can  well  under- 
stand that  it  was  a  memorable  day  to  him. 

[John  stood.]  This  expression  seems  to  imply  that  there  was 
some  particular  spot  near  Bethabara,  where  John  the  Baptist 
was  in  the  habit  of  standing,  to  preach,  and  to  receive  those  who 
came  to  be  baptized.  While  he  ''  stood  "  here,  the  event  which 
follows  took  place. 
36. — [Looliing.... Jesus ^  as  he  walked.]  This  probably  means  that  he 
saw  Jesus  walking  among  the  crowd  of  persons  who  were  at- 
tracted to  Bethabara,  alone,  without  followers,  and  as  yet  not 
recognized  by  any  one  as  the  Messiah. 

Stier  remarks,  "John  saw  Jesus  walking,  in  silent  meditation, 
waiting  for  His  hour,  and  His  Father's  commands ;  in  full  pre- 
paration for  the  world  and  its  sin  :  equipped  for  the  testimony 
to  the  truth,  with  that  armour,  which  has  been  tested  aud 
approved  in  His  first  great  spiritual  conflict ;  and  for  the  utter- 
ance of  the  new  words  of  God,  which  the  Father  has  given 
Him." 

[lie  saithj  behold,  t£-c.]  This  seems  to  have  been  a  second 
public  proclamation  of  our  Lord's  office  and  character,  a  partial 
repetition  of  what  had  been  said  the  day  before  ;  and  yet,  as  the 
event  shows,  a  more  effective  proclamation.  The  same  truth 
may  do  good  the  second  time  that  it  is  preached,  which  does 
noihing  the  first  time. 
d7 .  —  [Heard.. ..speak....foUowed.]  The  three  steps  described  in  this 
verse,  are  very  noteworthy.  John  the  Baptist  "speaks."  The 
disciples  "  hear,"  After  hearing  they  ''  follow  Jesus."  This  is 
a  succinct  summary  of  God's  way  of  saving  myriads  of  souls. 


72  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

Eollock  on  this  verse  remarks,  ''  We  learn  by  this  example, 
how  powerful  is  the  preaching  of  Christ, — yea,  one  or  two  words 
about  Christ  and  the  cross,  how  powerful  are  they  in  changing 
the  hearts  of  men !  Preach,  if  you  like,  about  the  great  deeds 
of  kings  and  generals,  and  their  courage  and  dory  ; — these  things 
will  please  men  for  a  little  time,  but  they  will  not  convert  them. 
But  preach  concerning  Him  that  was  crucified,  a  subject  appa- 
rently ignominious  and  foohsh, — and  then  the  story  of  the  cross, 
which  is  foolishness  to  them  that  perish,  will  be  the  power  and 
wisdom  of  God  to  them  that  believe." 

38. — [  What  seek  ye  ?]  We  cannot  doubt  that  our  Lord  knew  per- 
fectly  well  the  hearts  and  motives  of  these  two  disciples.  In 
asking  this  question,  therefore,  He  spoke  partly  for  th'iir  encou- 
ragement, and  partly  to  stir  them  up  to  self-inquiry.  "  What 
seek  ye  ?  Is  there  anything  that  I  can  do  for  you,  any  truth 
that  I  can  teach  you,  any  burden  that  I  can  take  away  ?  If  so, 
speak,  and  be  not  afraid." — "  What  seek  ye  ?  Are  you  sure 
that  you  are  following  me  with  right  motives?  Are  you  sure 
that  you  are  not  regarding  me  as  a  temporal  ruler  ?  Are  you 
sure  that  you  are  not,  like  other  Jews,  seeking  riches,  honour, 
greatness,  in  this  world  ?  Prove  your  own  selves,  and  be  sure 
that  you  are  seeking  the  right  object." 

[  Which  is  to  say,  being  interpreted.]  This  is  one  of  a  class  of 
expressions  which  shows  that  John  wrote  for  Gentile  readers 
rather  than  Jews.  A  Jew  would  not  have  needed  this  parenthe- 
tical comment.     This  same  remark  apphes  to  verse  41. 

[Where  dwellest  thou  ?]  This  question  seems  to  imply  a  desire 
for  conversation  and  private  communion.  *'  We  would  fain  know 
more  of  Thee.  We  are  drawn  to  Thee  by  John  the  Baptist's 
proclamation.  We  w^ould  like  to  go  aside  with  Thee  from  the 
crowd,  and  inquire  of  Thee  more  privately  and  quietly,  at  thy 
dwelling,  about  the  things  which  are  upon  our  heart"?." 

To  apply  the  text,  as  many  do,  to  our  Lord's  spiritual  dwell- 
ing in  ''contrite  hearts,"  &c.,  (Isaiah  Iviii.  15,)  may  produce 
good  doctrinal  and  practical  theology.  But  it  is  not  the  point 
of  the  text. 

3D — [Come  and  see.]  The  great  afFabilitv,  and  condescension  of 
these  first  words  of  our  Lord's  after  His  public  appearance  aa 
Messiah,  ought  not.  to  be  overlooked.  The  very  first  thing  that 
we  hear  Him  saying,  after  He  has  been  publicly  proclaimed  as 
the  "Lamb  of  God,"  is  ''Come  and  see."  It  is  a  pleasant  type 
of  wb.at  He  has  been  ever  saying  to  the  sons  of  men  from  that; 
day  down  to  thi?.  "  Come  and  see  who  I  am,  and  what  I  am. 
Come  and  be  acquainted  with  me." 

Schottgen  and  Lightfoot  both  remark,  that  the   expression 


73 

''  Come  and  see,"  is  a  very  common  one  in  Rabbinical  writings, 
and  would  be  very  familiar  to  the  Jews. 

[  Where  he  dwelt]  We  can  only  suppose  that  the  place  where 
our  Lord  was  dwelling  at  this  time,  was  some  temporary  resi- 
dence in  or  near  Bethabara.  At  the  best,  it  was  probably  some 
•  humble  lodging.  It  is  not  impossible  that  it  was  nothing  more 
than  a  cave.  He  often  "  had  not  where  to  lay  His  head,"  If 
the  two  disciples  had  the  least  relic  of  Jewish  expectation,  that 
Messiah  would  appear  in  royal  dignity  and  glory,  our  Lord's 
d  welling  would  go  far  to  disabuse  their  minds  of  the  idea. 

[Abode  with  Him  that  day. ..tenth  hour.]  The  Jewish  day  began 
at  six  o'clock  in  the  morning.  The  tenth  hour  therefore  means, 
four  o'clock  in  the  afternoon.  At  this  late  hour  of  the  day,  His 
disciples  found  it  impossible  to  conclude  their  couversatioa  with 
Jesus,  and  therefore  remained  in  the  same  lodging  with  Him  all 
night. 

Many  commentators,  from  Augustine  downwards,  make  the 
natural  remark,  that  this  evening  must  have  been  a  blessed 
evening  for  these  two  disciples ;  and  that  it  would  have  been 
pleasant  if  the  conversation  had  been  given  to  us  1  Yet  if  it 
had  been  good  for  us  to  know  the  conversation,  it  would  doubt- 
less have  been  recorded.  There  are  no  deficiencies  in  Scrip- 
ture. 

40. — [One  of  the  two... .was  Andrew.]  The  priority  of  Andrew  to 
Peter  ought  not  to  be  overlooked,  Peter,  to  whom  the  Church 
of  Rome  boastfully  attributes  a  primacy  among  the  apostles 
was  neither  converted  nor  made  acquainted  with  Christ,  so  soon 
as  his  brother. 

Who  the  other  of  these  two  disciples  was,  we  are  not  told.  It 
is  highly  probable,  as  Chrysostom  and  Theophylact  conjecture, 
that  it  was  St.  John  himself.  On  seven  other  occasions  in  this 
Gospel  he  humbly  withholds  his  name.  (John  xiii.  23  ;  xix.  26, 
35 ;  XX.  2 ;  xxi.  7, 20, 24.)  It  is  therefore  very  hkely  that  he  with- 
held it  here. — The  supposition  of  Musculus,  and  others,  that  the 
other  disciple  was  a  person  of  less  zeal  and  sincerity  than  Andrew, 
and  is  therefore  not  named,  appears  to  me  improbable. 

41. — [He  first.]  This  expression  must  either  mean  that  Andrew 
was  the  first  of  the  two  disciples  who  brought  a  brother  to 
Jesus. — or  that  he  was  the  first  disciple,  speaking  generally,  who 
spoke  to  others  of  the  Messiah,  when  he  had  found  Him, — or 
that  h(i  was  the  first  to  tell  his  brothei  Peter,  and  Peter  was  not 
the  first  to  tell  him  about  Christ. 

[  We  have  found.]  This  expression  implies  arv  unexpected  and 
joyful  discovery.     The   evening's   conversation    which  Andrew 


7-1  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

had  held   mth  Jesus,   had  convinced  him  that  He  was  indeed 
the  Christ. 

[Ihe  Messias... .interpreted....  Christ.]  It  is  almost  needless  to 
remark,  that  these  names  mean  the  "  anointed  one."  The  first 
is  Hebrew,  and  the  second  is  Greek.  Kings,  prophets,  and 
priests,  in  the  Old  Testament,  were  anointed,  and  our  Lord  as 
the  Prophet,  Priest,  and  King  of  the  Church  was  called  tne 
Anointed  One,  not  because  He  was  really  anointed  with  oil,  but 
because  he  was  "  anointed  with  the  Holy  Ghost."  (Acts  x.  38.) 

The  extent  of  Andrew's  religious  knowledge  ought  not  to  be 
overlooked.  Poor  and  humble  in  station  as  he  was,  he  seems, 
like  all  the  Jews,  to  have  known  what  the  Old  Testament 
prophets  had  foretold  about  Messiah,  and  to  have  been  prepared 
to  hear  of  a  person  appearing  in  the  character  of  Messiah.  It 
is  one  of  many  expressions  in  the  Gospels  which  show  that  the 
lower  orders  among  the  Jews  were  far  better  acquainted  with  the 
letter  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  than  the  poor  in  our  own 
day  generally  are  with  the  letter  of  the  New  Testament,  or  indeed 
of  any  part  of  the  Bible. 

Calvin  remarks  on  Andrew's  conduct,  "  Woe  to  our  indolence, 
if  we  do  not,  after  having  been  fully  enlightened,  endeavour 
to  make  others  partakers  of  the  same  griice." 

42. — [When  Jesus  heheld....said....thou  art  Simon.']  Our  Lord  here 
displayed  His  perfect  knowledge  of  all  persons,  names,  and 
things.  He  needed  not  that  any  should  tell  Him  who  and  what 
a  person  was.  This  knowledge  was  supposed  by  the  Jews  to  be 
a  peculiar  attribute  of  Messiah,  whenever  He  came.  He  was  to 
be  one  of  "  quick  understanding."  (Isaiah  xi.  3.)  Enough  fur 
us  to  know  that  it  is  a  peculiar  attribute  of  God.  He  alone 
knows  the  hearts  of  men.  Our  Lord's  perfect  knowledge  of  all 
hearts  was  one  among  many  proofs  of  His  divinity.  The  same 
knowledge  appears  again  in  His  address  to  Nathanael,  in  this 
chapter,  ver.  47,  and  in  His  conversation  with  the  Samaritan 
woman.  (John  iv.  18,  etc.) — The  eflect  produced  in  both  cases, 
is  very  worthy  of  notice. 

[Cephas.]  This  is  a  Syriac  word,  and  is  equivalent  to  the 
Greek  word  Petros,  which  we  render  Peter.  Both  mean  a  stone, 
a  portion  of  a  rock.  "Petra"  means  a  rock,  "Petros"  a  piece 
of  a  rock.     Peter  was  the  latter,  but  not  the  former. 

[A  stone.]  The  marginal  reading  here,  as  Lightfoot  remarks, 
would  have  been  much  better  than  that  which  the  translators 
have  put  in  our  version.  If  the  words  were  "Ceplias,  wldch  is 
by  interpretation  Peter,"  it  would  have  conveyed  our  Lord's 
meaning  far  more  clearly. 

The  custom   of   having   two   names  appears  to  have  been 


JOHN,    CHAP.    1.  75 

common  in  !N'ew  Testament  times.  The  apostle  Petei  seems  to 
have  been  only  known  as  "  Cephas"  in  the  Corinthian  Church. 
Out  of  the  five  other  places  in  the  New  Testament  where  the 
name  Cephas  is  found,  four  are  in  the  epistle  to  the  Corinthians, 
while  the  name  Peter  is  not  used  in  that  epistle  at  all. 

Nifanius  gives  the  names  of  three  Popes  who  have  so  grossly 
mistaken  the  origin  of  the  word  Cephas  as  to  suppose  that  it  is 
derived  from  the  Greek  word  which  signifies  "  a  head,"  and  that 
it  indicated  Peter's  headship  in  the  Church!  Such  a  palpable 
blunder  is  one  of  a  thousand  proofs  that  Popes  are  no  more  infal- 
lible than  other  men.  Calovius  makes  the  same  charge  against 
no  less  a  person  than  Cardinal  Beharmine, 

If  it  be  asked  why  our  Lord  gave  Simon  this  new  name,  the 
best  answer  appears  to  be  that  it  was  given  with  a  special  refer- 
ence to  the  change  which  grace  was  to  work  in  Simon's  heart. 
Naturally  impulsive,  unstable,  and  unsteady,  he  was  finally  to 
become  a  firm,  solid  stone  in  the  Church  of  Christ,  and  to  testify 
his  unshaken  adherence  to  Christ  by  suffering  martyrdom. 

Chrysostom  thinks  that  our  Lord  altered  Simon's  name  "  to 
show  that  it  was  He  who  gave  the  old  covenant,  that  it  was  He 
who  called  Abram  Abraham,  and  Sarai  Sarah,  and  Jacob  Israel." 

Lightfoot,  on  these  verses,  after  noticing  the  error  which 
Roman  Catholic  writers  attempt  to  found  upon  it,  about  Peter 
being  the  rock  upon  which  the  Church  is  built,  makes  the  following 
curious  observation, — "  If  they  will  so  pertinaciously  adhere  to 
it,  let  us  apprehend  our  Lord  speaking  prophetically ^  and  fore- 
telling the  grand  error  that  would  spring  up  in  the  Church, 
namely  that  Peter  is  a  rock,  than  which  the  Christian  Church  has 
known  nothing  more  sad  and  destructive." 

Let  it  be  noted,  in  leaving  this  passage,  that  the  selection  of 
such  humble  unlearned  men  as  th  -se  here  described,  to  be  the 
first  apostles  and  preachers  of  the  Grospel,  is  a  strong  evidence 
of  the  truth  of  Christianity.  A  religion  which  was  propagated 
by  such  weak  instruments,  in  the  face  of  persecution  and  oppo- 
sition from  the  great  and  learned,  must  be  a  religion  from  God. 
Such  results  from  such  instrumentahty  cannot  possibly  be  ac- 
counted for  on  natural  principles. 


JOHN  1.  43—51. 


43  The  day  following  Jesus 
would  go  forth  into  Galilee,  and 
findeth  Philip,  and  saith  unto  him, 
Follow  me. 


44  Now  Philip  was  of  Bethsaldn, 
the  city  of  Andrew  and  Peter. 

45  Philip  findeth  Nathanael,  and 
saith  unto  him.    We   have  found 


76 


EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 


him,  of  whocr  Moses  in  the  Law, 
and  the  PropI.ets,  did  write,  Jesus 
of  Nazareth,  the  son  of  Joseph. 

46  And  Nathanael  said  unto 
him,  Can  there  any  good  thing 
come  out  of  Nazareth?  Phihp 
eaith  unto  him,  Come  and  see. 

47  Jesus  saw  Nathanael  coming 
to  him,  and  saith  of  him,  Behold 
an  Israehte  indeed,  in  whom  is  no 
guile  I 

48  Nathanael  saith  unto  him, 
"Whence  knowest  thou  me  ?  Jesus 
answered  and  said  unto  him.  Be- 
fore that  Philip  called  thee,  when 


thou  wast  under  the  fig  tree,  I  saw 
thee. 

49  Nathanael  answered  and  saith 
unto  him,  Rabbi,  thou  art  the  Son 
of  God ;  thou  art  the  King  of  Israo^ 

50  Jesus  ar  swered  and  said  ur 
to  him.  Because  I  said  unto  thee, 
I  saw  thee  under  the  fig  tree,  be- 
lievest  thou  ?  thou  shalt  see  greater 
things  than  these. 

51  And  he  saith  unto  him.  Yen- 
ly,  verily,  I  say  unto  you.  Hereafter 
ye  shall  see  heaven  open,  and  the 
angels  of  God  ascending  and  de- 
scending upon  the  Son  of  man. 


Let  us  observe,  as  we  read  these  verses,  how  variovs  are 
the  ijaths  by  which  souls  are  led  into  the  narrow  way  of  life. 

We  are  told  of  a  man,  named  Philip,  being  added  to 
the  little  company  of  Christ's  disciples.  He  does  not 
appear  to  have  been  moved,  like  Andrew  and  his  com- 
panions, by  the  testimony  of  John  the  Baptist.  He  was 
not  drawn,  like  Simon  Peter,  by  the  out-spoken  declara- 
tion of  a  brother.  He  seems  to  have  been  called  directly 
by  Christ  Himself,  and  the  agency  of  man  seems  not  to 
have  been  used  in  his  calling.  Yet  in  faith  and  life  he 
became  one  with  those  who  were  disciples  before  him. 
Though  led  by  different  paths,  they  all  entered  the  same 
road,  embraced  the  same  truths,  served  the  same  Master, 
and  at  length  reached  the  same  home. 

The  fact  before  us  is  a  deeply  important  one.  It  throws 
light  on  the  history  of  all  God's  people  in  every  age,  and 
of  every  tongue.  There  are  diversities  of  operations  in 
the  saving  of  souls.  All  true  Christians  are  led  by  one 
Spirit,  washed  in  one  blood,  serve  one  Lord,  lean  on  one 
Saviour,  bcjieve  one  truth,  and  walk  by  one  general  rule. 
But  all  are  not  converted  in  one  and  the  same  manner. 
All  do  not  pass  through  the  same  experience.  In  conver- 
sion, the  Holy  Ghost  acts  as  a  sovereign.  He  calleth 
every  one  severally  as  He  will. 


JOHN,    CHAP.   I.  77 

A  careful  recollection  of  this  point  may  save  us  much 
trouble.  We  must  beware  of  making  the  experience  of 
other  believers  the  measure  of  our  own.  We  must  beware 
of  denying  another's  grace,  because  he  has  not  been  led 
by  the  same  way  as  ourselves.  Has  a  man  got  the  real 
grace  of  God  ?  This  is  the  only  question  that  concerns 
us. — Is  he  a  penitent  man  ?  Is  he  a  believer  ?  Does  he 
live  a  holy  life  ? — Provided  these  inquiries  can  be  answered 
satisfactorily,  we  may  well  be  content.  It  matters  nothing 
by  what  path  a  man  has  been  led,  if  he  has  only  been  led 
at  last  into  the  right  way. 

Let  us  observe,  secondly,  in  these  verses,  how  much  of 
Christ  there  is  in  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  We  read 
that  when  Philip  described  Christ  to  Nathanael,  he  says, 
"  We  have  found  Him  of  whom  Moses  in  the  law  and  the 
prophets  did  write." 

Christ  is  the  sum  and  substance  of  the  Old  Testament. 
To  Him  the  earliest  promises  pointed  in  the  days  of  Adam, 
and  Enoch,  and  Noah,  and  Abraham,  and  Isaac,  and  Jacob. 
To  Him  every  sacrifice  pointed  in  the  ceremonial  worship 
appointed  at  Mount  Sinai.  Of  Him  every  high  priest  was 
a  type,  and  every  part  of  the  tabernacle  was  a  shadow, 
and  every  judge  and  deliverer  of  Israel  was  a  figure.  He 
was  the  prophet  like  unto  Moses,  whom  the  Lord  God 
promised  to  send,  and  the  King  of  the  house  of  David,  who 
came  to  be  David's  Lord  as  well  as  son.  He  was  the  Son 
of  the  virgin,  and  the  Lamb,  foretold  by  Isaiah, — the 
righteous  Branch  mentioned  by  Jeremiah, — the  true  Shep- 
herd, foreseen  by  Ezekiel, — the  Messenger  of  the  Cove- 
nant, promised  by  Malachi, — and  the  Messiah,  who,  accord- 
ing to  Daniel,  was  to  be  cut  off,  though  not  for  Himself. 
The  further  we  read  in  the  volume  of  the  Old  Testament, 
the  clearer  do  we  find  the  testimony  about  Christ.  The 
'  light  which  the  inspired  writers  enjoyed  in  ancient  daya 
was,  at  best,  but  dim,  compared  to  that  of  the  Gospel. 


78  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

But  the  coming  Person  tliey  all  saw  afar  oft*,  and  on  whom 
they  all  fixed  their  eyes,  was  one  and  the  same.  The 
Spirit,   which  was  in  them,  testified  of  Christ.    (1  Pet. 

i.  11.) 

Do  we  stumble  at  this  saying  ?  Do  we  find  it  hard  to 
see  Christ  in  the  Old  Testament,  because  we  do  not  see 
His  name  ?  Let  us  be  sure  that  the  fault  is  all  our  own. 
It  is  our  spiritual  vision  which  is  to  blame,  and  not  the 
book.  The  eyei  of  our  understanding  need  to  be  enlight- 
ened. The  veil  has  yet  to  be  taken  away.  Let  us  pray 
for  a  more  humble,  childlike,  and  teachable  spirit,  and 
let  us  take  up  "Moses  and  the  prophets"  again.  Christ 
is  there,  though  our  eyes  may  not  yet  have  seen  Him. 
May  we  never  rest  till  we  can  subscribe  to  our  Lord's 
words  about  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  "They  are 
they  which  testify  of  me."  (John  v.  39.) 

Let  us  observe,  thirdly,  in  these  verses,  the  good  advice 
which  Philip  gave  to  Nathanael.  The  mind  of  Nathanael 
was  full  of  doubts  about  the  Saviour,  of  whom  Philip  told 
Him.  "  Can  there  any  good  thing,"  he  said,  "  come  out 
of  Nazareth  ?"  And  what  did  Philip  reply  ?  He  said, 
"  Come  and  see." 

Wiser  counsel  than  this  it  would  be  impossible  to  con- 
ceive !  If  Philip  had  reproved  Nathanael's  unbelief,  he 
might  have  driven  him  back  for  many  a  day,  and  given 
offence.  If  he  had  reasoned  with  him,  he  might  have 
failed  to  convince  him,  or  might  have  confirmed  him  in  his 
doubts.  But  by  inviting  him  to  prove  the  matter  for  him- 
self, he  showed  his  entire  confidence  in  the  truth  of  his 
own  assertion,  and  his  willingness  to  have  it  tested  and 
proved.  And  the  result  shows  the  wisdom  of  Philip's 
words.  Nathanael  owed  his  early  acquaintance  with  Christ 
to  that  frank  invitation,  "  Come  and  see." 

If  we  call  ourselves  true  Christians,  let  us  never  be 
afraid  to  deal  with  people  about  their  souls  as  Philip  dealt 


JOHN,    CHAP.    I.  79 

%vit]i  ^f»thaiiael.  Let  us  invite  tbem  boldly  to  make  proof 
of  otr  religion.  Let  us  tell  them  confidently  that  they 
cannot  know  its  real  value  until  they  have  tried  it.  Let 
us  assure  them  that  vital  Christianity  courts  every  possible 
inquiry.  It  has  no  secrets.  It  has  nothing  to  conceal. 
Its  faith  and  practice  are  spoken  against,  just  because  they 
are  not  known.  Its  enemies  speak  evil  of  things  with 
which  they  are  not  acquainted.  They  understand  neither 
what  they  say  nor  whereof  they  afiirm.  Philip's  mode  of 
dealing,  we  may  be  sure,  is  one  principal  way  to  do  good. 
Few  are  ever  moved  by  reasoning  and  argument.  Still 
fewer  are  frightened  into  repentance.  The  man  who  does 
most  good  to  souls,  is  often  the  simple  believer  who  says 
to  his  friends,  "  I  have  found  a  Saviour ;  come  and  see 
Him." 

Let  us  observe,  lastly,  in  these  verses,  the  high  character 
which  Jesus  gives  of  Nathanael.  He  calls  him  "  an  Israelite 
indeed,  in  whom  is  no  guile." 

Nathanael,  there  can  be  no  doubt,  was  a  true  child  of 
God,  and  a  child  of  God  in  difficult  times.  He  was  one 
of  a  very  little  flock.  Like  Simeon  and  Anna,  and  other 
pious  Jews,  he  was  living  by  faith  and  waiting  prayer- 
fully for  the  promised  Redeemer,  when  our  Lord's 
ministry  began.  He  had  that  which  grace  alone  can 
give,  an  honest  heart,  a  heart  without  guile.  His  know- 
ledge was  probably  small.  His  spiritual  eyesight  waa 
dim.  But  he  was  one  who  had  lived  carefully  up  to  his 
light.  He  had  diligently  used  such  knowledge  as  he 
possessed.  His  eye  had  been  single,"  though  his  vision 
had  not  been  strong.  His  spiritual  judgment  had  been 
honest,  though  it  had  not  been  powerful.  What  he  saw 
in  Scripture,  he  had  held  firmly,  in  spite  of  Pharisees 
and  Sadducees,  and  all  the  fashionable  religion  of  the 
day.  He  was  an  honest  Old  Testament  believer,  who 
had  stood  alone.     And  here  was  the  secret  of  our  Lord's 


80  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

peculiar  commendation!  He  declared  ISTatlianael  to  be 
a  true  son  of  Abraham, — a  Jew  inwardly,  possessing 
circumcision  in  the  spirit  as  well  as  in  the  letter, — an 
Israelite  in  heart,  as  well  as  a  son  of  Jacob  iu  the  flesh. 

Let  us  pray  that  we  may  be  of  the  same  spirit  as 
Kathanael.  An  honest,  unprejudiced  mind, — a  child-like 
willingness  to  follow  the  truth,  wherever  the  truth  may 
lead  us, — a  sim]3le,  hearty  desire  to  be  guided,  taught,  and 
led  by  the  Spirit, — a  thorough  determination  to  use  every 
spark  of  light  which  we  have, — are  a  possession  of  price- 
less value.  A  man  of  this  spirit  may  live  in  the  midst 
of  much  darkness,  and  be  surrounded  by  every  possible 
disadvantage  to  his  soul.  But  the  Lord  Jesus  will  take 
care  that  such  a  man  does  not  miss  the  way  to  heaven. 
"The  meek  will  he  guide  in  judgment:  and  the  meek 
will  he  teach  his  way."  (Psalm  xxv.  9.) 

Notes.     John  L  43 — 51. 

43. — [The  day  following.]  This  is  the  fourth  successive  day  which 
is  specially  named  by  St.  John,  and  its  events  described.  The 
first  contained  John  the  Baptisfs  reply  to  the  priests  and  Levites, 
— the  second,  his  public  announcement  of  our  Lord  as  the 
Lamb  of  God, — the  third,  the  calling  of  Andrew  and  his  com- 
panion, and  Peter, — the  fourth  describes  the  calling  of  Philip 
and  Nathanael. 

[  Would  go  fo7'th.']  The  Greek  word  rendered  "  would,"  signifieg 
that  our  Lord  "  willed  or  had  a  will." 

{Findeth  Philip.']  It  does  not  appear  where  Philip  was  when 
Jesus  called  him.  He  must  either  have  been  at  Bethabara, 
among  John's  hearers, — or  at  some  place  ou  the  road  from 
Bethabara  to  Galilee, — or  at  his  own  native  place,  Bethsaida. 
The  last  ia  perhaps  the  most  probable  idea 

[Follow  me.]  This  simple  sentence  describe?  the  direct  quick* 
ening  voice  of  an  almighty  Saviour.  It  is  evident  that  the  power 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  accompanied  our  Lord's  words,  and  that  as 
soon  as  they  were  spoken,  Philip,  like  Matthew  the  publican, 
arose,  left  all,  and  became  a  disciple.  In  conversion  God  acta 
as  a  sovereign.  One  is  called  in  one  way,  and  another  in  another. 
.RoUock  observes  on  this  verse,  "  This  teaches  us  that  Christ  ia 


JOHN,    CHAP.   I.  81 

able  to  call  any  one  whom  He  pleases  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  without  the  ministry  either  of  angel  or  man." 

44. — [Philip...  of  Bethsaida city Andrew Peter ^     This  verse 

seems  to  make  it  probable  that  Piiihp's  conversion  and  calling 
took  place  at  Bethsaida.  Andrew  and  Peter  having  been  con- 
verted and  become  companions  of  Jesus  on  His  way  to  Galilee, 
•would  appear  to  have  taken  Him  to  their  own  native  place, 
Bethsaida. 

i5  — [  We  have  found  Mm.]  Philip,  like  his  fellow-citizen,  Andrew, 
seems  to  have  expected  the  appearance  of  Messiah. 

Chrysostom  remarks,  "  Seest  thou  what  a  thoughtful  mind  he 
had,  how  assiduously  he  meditates  on  the  writings  of  Moses,  and 
expected  the  advent?  The  expression,  'we  have  found,'  belongs 
always  to  those  who  are  in  some  way  seeking." 

[IIim....3foses... .prophets  did  ivrite.]  Here,  as  in  the  case  of 
Andrew,  we  should  notice  the  famiharity  with  the  general  con- 
tents of  Scripture  which  a  poor  Jew  like  Phihp  possessed.  He 
thoroughly  understood  that  "  Moses  and  the  prophets"  held  forth 
the  promise  of  a  coming  Kedeemer,  and  that  a  better  Priest, 
Prophet,  and  King  were  foretold  in  their  writings.  "  The  Old 
Testament,"  as  the  Church  of  England  Article  wisely  declares, 
"is  not  contrary  to  the  New;  for  both  in  the  Old  Testament  and 
New,  everlasting  lile  is  offered  to  mankind  by  Christ."  We  must 
beware,  in  these  latter  days,  of  despising  the  Old  Testament.  It 
is  one  by-path  to  infidelity. 

[Jesus  of  Nazarei'h...son  of  Joseph.]  Philip  here  describes  our 
Lord  according  to  the  common  report  about  Him,  and  in  all 
probability  according  to  his  own  present  knowledge.  His  heart 
was  at  present  better  than  his  head.  The  miraculous  conception 
of  Christ  was  hidden  from  him.  Yet  it  is  not  unworthy  of 
remark,  that  this  ignorant  account  of  our  Lord  was  very  likely  the 
cause  of  Nathanael's  doubt  and  prejudice,  exhibited  in  the  next 
verse.  The  mistakes  of  young  converts  are  often  mighty  stum- 
bling-blocks in  the  way  of  other  people's  souls.  We  must  not, 
however,  despise  Philip  because  of  his  mistake.  Eollock  remarks, 
"  I  had  rather  a  man  should  stammer  and  babble  about  Christ, 
providing  he  does  it  sincerely  and  from  his  heart,  and  has  before 
i  him  as  an  object  the  glory  of  Grod  and  salvation  of  men,  than 
say  many  things  eloquently  about  Christ,  for  ostentation  and 
vain  glory." 

x6. — [Can  any  good  thing. ..come.. .Nazareth?]  This  question  shows 
the  low  estimate  in  which  Nazareth,  where  our  Lord  had 
been  brought  up,  was  held.  It  was  an  obscure  town  in  a  corner 
of  Q-alilee,  not  far  from  the  borders  of  the  province,  and  its 
reputation  seems  to  have  been  very  bad.     Nathanael  could  not 

4* 


82  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

remember  anj  prophecy  about  Messiah  coming  out  of  jSTazareth. 
and  at  once  stumbled  at  the  idea  of  Him  whom  "Moses  and 
the  prophets"  had  desoribed,  belonging  to  such  a  contemptible 
place. 

The  condescension  of  our  Lord  in  living  thirty  years  in  such 
a  place  as  Nazareth,  is  strongly  brought  out  by  Nathan ael's 
question. 

Augustine,  Cyril,  Origen,  and  others  thought  that  the  sentence 
before  us  ought  not  to  be  interpreted  as  a  question,  but  as  a 
simp'.e  affirmation,  "  Some  good  thing  may  come  out  of  Nazareth." 
Wycliffe's  version  also  takes  this  vievs^.  The  sentence  would 
then  be  the  expression  of  a  calm  and  unprejudiced  mind, 
acknowledging  the  possibihty  of  good  coming  from  Nazareth. 
Musculus  thinks  it  possible,  in  this  view  of  the  expression,  that 
Nathanael  might  have  had  in  his  mind  the  remarkable  pro- 
phetical saying  quoted  in  St.  Matthew,  "  He  shall  be  called  a 
Nazarenel"  The  judgment  of  the  great  majority  of  interpreters 
agrees  with  our  own  translation,  that  it  is  a  question,  and 
not  an  assertion ;  and  it  is  by  far  the  more  probable  view  of  the 
text. 

l^Come  and  see.]  How  common  this  expression  was  among 
the  Jewish  religious  teachers  has  been  already  noticed.  Philip's 
wisdom  in  not  arguing  and  reasoning  with  Nathanael,  should  be 
observed.  Ford  gives  a  good  quotation  from  Adam,  "  Little  good 
comes  by  disputing.  Pride  is  generally  at  the  bottom  of  it,  and 
not  charity  or  love  of  truth;  and  it  is  seldom  managed  with 
decency  or  candour  enough  to  produce  any  good  effect.  Let  fall 
a  word  in  season,  and  wait  in  patience  till  the  rain  drops  on  it 
from  heaven." 

47. — \_In  whom  is  no  guile]  It  is  very  likely  that  in  using  this 
expression  our  Lord  referred  to  the  32nd  Psalm,  where  the 
character  of  the  godly  man  is  described.  He  is  not  only  one 
whose  iniquities  are  forgiven,  but  one  ''  in  whose  lips  there  is  no 
guile."  The  expression  imphes  a  true  heart,  a  really  converted 
man,  a  genuine  son  of  Abraham  by  faith,  as  well  as  a  son  accord- 
ing to  the  flesh. 

Hutcheson  observes,  "  The  true  mark  of  a  true  Israelite  m 
spirit,  is  not  sinlessness  or  perfection,  but  sincerity." 

48. — [  Whence  Jcnowest  thou  me  ?]  This  question  implies  Nathanael's 
surprise  that  Jesus  should  exhibit  any  knowledge  of  his  cha- 
racter. 

[When...under.. Jig-tree  I  saw  thee.]  The  common  opinion 
about  this  expression  is,  that  Nathanael  was  praying  or  holding 
(:ommunion  with  God  under  the  fig-tree.  It  may  be  so.  We  are 
told  nothing  about  it,  and  are  entirely  left  to  conjecture.     If  it 


JOHN,    CHAP.    I.  83 

ftad  been  good  for  us  to  know,  it  would  have  been  told  us. 
Sufficient  for  us  to  understand  that  when  Nathanael  thought 
he  was  alone  and  no  eye  upon  him,  the  Lord  Jesus,  by  His 
divine  power  of  seeing  and  knowing  all  things,  was  perfectly 
acquainted  with  all  that  Nathanael  said,  thought,  and  did.  His 
"  eyes  are  in  every  place."  (Prov.  xv.  3.) 

Chrysostom  and  Theophylact  think  that  the  expression  only 
refers  to  the  conversation  between  Philip  and  Nathanael  about 
Jesus,  which  had  taken  place  under  a  fig-tree.  Grrotius  takes 
the  same  view. 

Grill  mentions  a  tradition  in  the  Syriac  dictionary,  "that 
Nathanael's  mother  had  laid  him  under  a  fig-tree  when  the 
infants  were  slain  at  Bethlehem  by  Herod,"  (Matt,  ii,  16,)  and 
that  our  Lord  showed  His  perfect  knowledge  by  referring  to  this 
fact. 

Heinsius  thinks  there  is  a  reference  to  the  prophecy  of  Zecha- 
riah,  ''  In  that  day  ye  shall  call  every  man  his  neighbour,  under 
the  vine  and  under  the  fig-tree,"  (Zech.  iii.  10,)  and  that  hence 
Nathanael  drew  the  inference  that  Messiah's  days  were  come, 
and  Messiah  before  him. 

Augustine  sees  an  allegory  in  the  fig-tree,  and  gravely  says, 
"  that  as  Adam  and  Eve,  when  they  had  sinned,  made  themselves 
aprons  of  fig-leaves,  fig-leaves  must  signify  sins.  Nathanael 
therefore  being  under  the  fig-tree,  signifies  being  under  the  sha- 
dow of  death !  " 
i9. — [Thou  art... Son  of  God.. .King  of  Israel]  These  words  are  the 
outburst  of  a  heart  convinced  at  once  that  Jesus  was  the  Mes- 
siah. They  are  a  noble  confession  that  our  Lord  was  that  divine 
Person  who  was  promised  to  come  into  the  world  to  redeem  sin- 
ners, and  that  King  who  was  prophesied  of  as  the  future  Gather- 
er and  Ruler  of  the  tribes  of  Israel.  Whether  Nathanael  clearly 
understood  the  nature  of  our  Lord's  kingdom  at  this  time,  may 
be  reasonably  doubted.  But  that  he  saw,  like  Peter,  that  He 
was  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  Blessed,  we  cannot  doubt.  Tho 
restoring  of  the  kingdom  to  Israel  was  a  subject  which  we  know 
from  other  pa  siges  of  Scripture,  was  one  of  the  last  which  the 
first  disciples  were  able  to  understand  aright.  (Acts  i.  6.) 

The  history  of  Nathanael's  calling  at  this  point  should  be 
compared  with  that  of  the  woman  of  Samaria,  in  the  fourth 
chapter  of  this  G^ospel.  It  is  striking  to  observe  that  a  discovery 
and  conviction  of  our  Lord's  perfect  knowledge  of  the  most  se- 
cret things,  was  in  both  cases  the  turning  point. 

It  should  not  be  forgotten,  that  the  title  "  King  of  Israel,"  was 
one  which  our  Lord  never  refused  during  His  ministry,  though 
He  never  took  to  Himself  His  great  power  and  actually  reigned. 


84  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

The  angc4  Gabriel  foretold  that,  the  "  Lord  God  would  give  unto 
Him  the  throne  of  His  father  David,  and  that  He  would  lei  n 
over  the  house  of  Jacob,  and  that  of  His  kingdom  there  would 
be  no  end."  (Luke  i.  32,  33.)  When  the  wise  men  came  from 
the  East,  they  inquired  for  him  who  was  born  "  Kinir  of  th 
Jews."  (Matt.  ii.  2.)  When  our  Lord  was  crucified,  the  title 
over  His  head  was,  "  King  of  the  Jews."  All  this  shall  yet  be 
literally  true.  Christ  shall  yet  be  King  in  Zion,  and  reign  over 
the  gathered  and  restored  tribes  of  Israel  at  His  second  coming. 
And  then  the  words  of  Nathanael  shall  be  seen  completely  ful- 
filled He  shall  be  acknowledged  by  all  ai  the  "  Son  of  God, 
and  King  of  Israel." 

50. — [Believest  thou  ?]  It  admits  of  a  question  whether  this  ex- 
pression would  not  be  bet'er  rendered,  as  it  might  be  with  per- 
fect gramma*  ical  correctness,  "thou  believest."  It  would  then 
be  very  like  our  Lord's  words  to  Thomas,  "  Because  thou  hast 
seen  me,  thou  hast  believed."  (John  xx.  29.)  The  sense  would 
be,  "  Because  I  said  I  saw  thee  under  the  fig-tree  thou  believest. 
It  is  well.  Great  is  thy  faith.  But  I  tell  thee  for  thy  comfort 
and  encouragement,  that  thou  shalt  one  day  see  far  greater 
proofs  of  my  divinity  and  Messiahship  than  these."  Wycliffe's, 
Tyndale's,  and  Cranmer's  versions,  all  render  the  expression  as 
an  atiirmation,  and  not  as  a  question.  Aretius  maintains  the 
same  view. 

61.— [Verily  J  verily  I  say.]  This  expression  is  peculiar  to  St.  John's 
Gospel,  and  very  remarkable.  It  is  the  word  which  is  familiar 
to  all  Christians,  "  Amen,"  twice  repeated.  It  is  found  twenty- 
five  times  in  this  G-ospe',  always  at  the  beginning  of  a  sentence, 
and  always  used  by  Christ.  In  every  place  it  implies  a  very 
solemn,  emphatic  assertion  of  some  great  truth,  or  heart-search- 
ing fact.  No  other  writer  in  the  New  Testament,  except  St. 
John,  ever  gives  the  double  "Amen." 

[Hereafter... ye  shall  see.. .heaven.. .angels. ..Son  of  man.]  This 
prediction  is  very  remarkable.  It  should  be  carefully  observed, 
that  it  is  i.ot  addressed  to  Nathanael  alone.  The  preceding  verse 
says,  "thou  shalt  see."  The  present  verse  says,  "  ye  shall  see," 
— that  is,  "  thou  and  all  my  other  disciples." 

About  the  true  meaning  of  the  prediction,  commentators  differ 
exceedingly.  Arguing,  as  nearly  all  do,  that  the  words  plainly 
refer  to  Jacob's  vision  of  the  ladder  reaching  from  heaven  to 
earth,  (Gen.  xxviii.  12,)  they  disagree  about  the  way  in  which 
the  prediction  is  fulfilled. 

Some  think,  as  Stier,  that  the  predicion  must  be  interpreted 
figuratively,  and  that  it  was  fulfilled  when  our  Lord  was  upon 
earth.  They  think  it  only  means  that  Nathanael  and  the  other 
disciplots  would  see  a  still  fuller  revelation  of  Christ  and  t!:e 


85 

Gospel  by  and  bye.  They  would  see  a  figurative  fulfilment  of 
Jacob's  vision,  and  a  way  opened  from  earth  to  heaven  for  all 
true  IsraeUtes  or  believers.  They  would  see  still  greater  proofs, 
in  the  shape  of  miracles  and  signs,  that  Jesus  was  the  bon  of 
God,  Heaven,  ir.  a  spiritual  sense  shut  by  the  sin  of  the  first 
Adam,  would  be  opened  by  the  obedience  of  the  second  Adam. 
"  The  heavenly  ladder,"  says  Bonaventura,  quoted  by  Calovius, 
"  was  broken  in  Adam  and  repaired  in  Christ." — According  to 
this  view,  '"  the  angels  of  Grod  "  in  the  text  mean  nothing  in 
particular,  which,  to  say  the  least,  seems  a  very  loose  and  un- 
sati  factory  explanation. 

Others  think,  as  Rollock,  that  the  prediction  must  be  inter- 
preted literally,  and  that  it  was  fulfilled  while  our  Lord  was  on 
earth.  They  think  it  was  accomplished  when  our  Lord  was 
transfigured, — when  an  angel  appeared  in  the  garden  of  Geth- 
semane, — and  when  our  Lord  ascended  on  the  Mount  of  Olives. 
Tills  view  also  seems  very  unsatisfiictory.  The  transfiguration 
and  the  agony  in  the  garden,  were  not  seen  by  Nathanael  at  all. 
There  is  nothing  whatever  said  about  angels  appearing,  either 
at  the  transfiguration  or  the  ascension.  And  as  to  "angels. as- 
cending and  descending,"  there  is  nothing  at  any  period  of  the 
Gospel  history  at  all  answering  to  the  expression. 

The  only  true  and  satisfactory  view,  I  behove,  is  that  which 
makes  the  whole  prediction  apply  to  events  which  are  still  future. 
Our  Lord  spoke  of  His  second  coming  and  kingdom.  When  He 
comes  the  second  time  to  take  His  great  power  and  reign,  the 
words  of  this  text  shall  be  literally  fulfilled.  His  believing  peo- 
ple shall  see  heaven  open,  and  a  constant  communication  kept  up 
between  heaven  and  earth, — the  tabernacle  of  God  with  men, 
and  the  angels  visibly  ministering  to  the  King  of  Israel,  and 
King  of  all  the  earth. 

The  context  confirms  me  in  this  view  of  the  text.  Nathanael 
believed  Jesus  to  be  the  Messiah,  when  he  was  lowly  and  poor. 
Jesus  rewards  his  faith  by  assuring  him  that,  lowly  as  He  now 
seems.  He  shall  one  day  come  in  the  clouds  of  heaven  and  reign 
as  a  King, 

I  am  further  confirmed  by  the  striking  likeness  between  our 
Lord's  words  here,  and  those  He  addressed  to  the  chief  priests, 
in  the  day  that  He  was  arraigned  as  a  prisoner  before  them. 
"Hereafter  ye  Aall  see  the  Son  of  man  sitting  on  the  right  hand 
of  power,  and  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven."  (Matt,  xxvi,  64.) 

This  view  of  the  p'-ediction  is  maintained  by  Gomarus. 

I  am  aware  that  son:e  maintain,  in  opposition  to  the  view  I 
support,  that  the  Greek  word  rendered  "  hereafter,"  must  mean 
"  from  henceforth,  i.  e  immediately  after  the  present  time,  and 


86  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

ever  hereafter,"  and  does  not  imply  a  distant  event.  In  reply, 
I  would  have  it  specially  noted,  that  the  Greek  word  here  trans- 
lated "  hereafter,"  is  the  very  same  that  is  used  b}^  our  Lord  in 
the  solemn  words,  just  quoted,  which  he  addressed  to  the  chief 
priests  when  He  was  arraigned.  (Matt.  xxvi.  69.)  In  that  case, 
there  cannot  be  any  reasonable  doubt  that  He  spoke  of  a  far 
distant  event  and  time.  I  believe,  that  in  like  manner.  He 
speaks  of  a  far  distant  event  and  time  in  this  place. 

As  to  the  nature  of  Christ's  future  kingdom,  and  the  inter- 
course which  shall  then  be  kept  up  by  angels  between  earth  and 
heaven,  this  is  not  the  place  to  speak.  I  only  remark,  that  the 
words  before  us  will  probably  receive  a  far  more  real  and  literal 
accomplishment  than  many  of  us  are  expecting. 

It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  Nathanael  calls  our  Lord  "  the 
Son  of  Gro^l."  Jesus  in  His  prediction  tells  him  he  shall  see 
angels  ascending  and  descending  on  the  "  Son  of  man."  He 
whom  Nathanael  now  saw  as  a  man,  would  yet  appear  as  man 
glorified  in  the  heavenly  kingdom.  He  would  even  then  be 
G-od-man.  The  expression  "  Son  of  man,"  here  first  used  by  St. 
•John,  seems  derived,  as  Chemnitius  says,  from  Daniel's  words  in 
a  prophecy  about  Messiah.  (Dan.  vii.  13,  14.)  It  is  never  applied 
to  our  Lord  by  any  but  Himself,  except  by  Stephen.  (Acts  vii. 
56.)  Lightfoot  thinks  that  "  it  is  used  so  often  by  our  Saviour 
about  Himself,  as  intimating  that  he  is  the  second  Adam,  the 
true  seed  of  the  woman." 

In  leaving  this  passage,  the  question  naturally  arises,  Who 
was  Nathanael  ?  How  is  it  that  we  hear  so  little  afterwards  of 
so  good  a  man  and  so  clear-sighted  a  believer  ? 

Some  think,  as  Augustine  and  others,  that  Nathanael  was 
purposely  not  placed  among  our  Lord's  immediate  companions 
and  apostles,  because  he  was  a  man  of  learning  and  knowledge, 
lest  any  should  say  that  our  Lord  chose  learned  men  to  be  His 
first  ministers.  I  can  see  nothing  in  this  argument.  There  is 
no  evidence  to  my  own  mind  that  Nathanael  was  more  leai-ned 
than  other  Jews  of  humble  birth,  in  our  Lord's  time.  More- 
over he  was  a  friend  of  Philip,  one  of  our  Lord's  apostles,  and 
most  probably  a  man  of  similar  position  and  attainments. — In 
fact  we  are  told  elsewhere  that  he  lived  at  "  Cana  of  Galilee." 
(John  xxi.  1.) 

Some  think,  because  Nathanael  lived  at  Cana,  that  he  was  the 
same  person  as  the  apostle  Simon  the  Canaanite,  (Matt.  x.  4 ; 
Mark  iii.  18.) 

Some  think,  that  he  was  Stephen  the  martyr,  because  Stephen 
saw  the  hear 3ns  opened  in  vision.  (Acts  vii.  56.) 


JOHN,    CHAP.    II. 


87 


The  most  probable  opinion  to  my  own  mind  is,  that  Nathanae! 
was  the  apostle  who  is  called  elsewhere  Bartholomew,  and  who, 
hke  others  of  the  apostles,  had  two  names.  In  favour  of  this 
opinion  there  are  three  remarkable  facts.  The  first  is,  that  in 
three  lists  of  the  twelve  apostles  out  of  four,  the  names  of  Philip 
and  Bartholomew  are  always  found  together.  (Matt.  x.  3;  Mark 
iii.  18 ;  Luke  vi.  14.) — The  second  is,  that  Nathanael  is  specially 
mentioned  after  our  Lord's  ascension  as  a  companion  of  Peter, 
Thomas,  James,  John,  and  two  other  disciples. — The  third  is, 
that  St.  John  never  once  mentions  the  name  of  Bartholomew 
in  his  Grospel. — The  objection  that  Nathanael's  name  is  never 
mentioned  by  Matthew,  Mark,  or  Luke,  is  of  no  weight.  No  one 
of  the  three,  it  may  be  replied,  tells  us  that  Peter  was  called 
Cephas.  Only  Matthew  gives  Jude,  the  brother  of  James,  the 
name  of  Lebbaeus. 

The  point  happily  is  not  one  of  any  particular  importance.  I 
only  say  that  the  conjectural  probabihty  that  Nathanael  was  an 
apostle,  and  was  the  same  as  Bartholomew,  seems  to  me  very 
strong  and  well  founded. 

In  leaving  this  chapter  the  observation  of  Aretius  is  worth 
quoting.  He  remarks  that  the  chapter  is  singularly  rich  in 
names  or  epithets  applied  to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  He  num- 
bers up  the  following  twenty-one.  1.  The  Word.  2.  God.  3. 
Life.  4.  Light.  5.  The  true  light.  6.  The  only  begotten  of 
the  Father.  7.  Full  of  grace  and  truth.  8.  Jesus  Christ.  9. 
The  only  begotten  Son.  10.  The  Lord.  11.  The  Lamb  of  God. 
12.  Jesus.  13.  A  Man.  14.  The  Son  of  God.  15.  Rabbi.  16. 
Teacher.  17.  Messiah.  18.  Christ.  19.  The  Son  of  Joseph. 
20.  The  King  of  Israel.     21.  The  Son  of  man. 


JOHN  IL  1.— 11. 


1  And  the  third  day  there  was  a 
marriage  in  Cana  of  Galilee ;  and 
the  mother  of  Jesus  was  there  : 

2  And  both  Jesus  was  called,  and 
his  disciples,  to  the  marriage. 

3  And  when  they  wanted  wine, 
the  mother  of  Jesus  saith  unto  him, 
They  have  no  wine. 

4  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  "Woman, 
what  have  I  to  do  with  thee  ?  mine 
hour  is  not  yet  come. 

6  His  mother  saith  unto  the  ser- 


vants, Whatsoever  he  saith  unto 
you,  do  it. 

6  And  there  were  set  there  six 
waterpots  of  stone,  after  the  man- 
ner of  the  purifying  of  the  Jews, 
containing  two  or  three  firkins 
apiece. 

7  Jesus  saith  unto  them,  Fill  the 
waterpots  with  water.  And  they 
filled  them  up  to  the  brim. 

8  And  he  saith  unto  them,  Draw 
out  now,  and  bear  unto  the  gov- 


88 


EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 


ernor  of  the  feast.    And  they  bare 
it. 

9  When  the  ruler  of  the  feast 
had  tasted  the  water  that  was  made 
wine,  and  knew  not  whence  it  was : 
(but  the  servants  which  drew  the 
water  knew ;)  the  governor  of  the 
feast  called  the  bridegroom, 

10  And  saith  unto  him,  Every 


man  at  the  beginning  doth  set  forth 
good  wine;  and  when  men  hava 
well  drunk,  then  that  which  is 
worse :  but  thou  hast  kept  the  good 
wine  until  now. 

11  This  beginning  of  miracles 
did  Jesus  iu  Cana  of  Galilee,  and 
manifested  forth  his  glory ;  and  his 
disciples  beUeved  on  him. 


These  verses  describe  a  miracle  which  should  always 
possess  a  special  interest  in  the  eyes  of  a  true  Christian. 
It  is  the  first,  in  order  of  time,  of  the  many  mighty 
works  which  Jesus  did,  when  He  was  upon  earth.  We 
are  distinctly  told,  "  This  beginning  of  miracles  did  Jesus 
in  Cana  of  Galilee." — Like  every  other  miracle  which  St. 
John  was  inspired  to  record,  it  is  related  with  great 
minuteness  and  particularity.  And,  like  every  other 
miracle  in  St.  John's  Gospel,  it  is  rich  in  spiritual  les- 
sons. 

We  learn,  firstly,  from  these  verses,  how  honourable  in 
the  sight  of  Christ  is  the  estate  of  matrimony.  To  be 
present  at  a  "  marriage"  was  almost  the  first  public  act  of 
our  Lord's  earthly  ministry. 

Marriage  is  not  a  sacrament,  as  the  Church  of  Rome 
asserts.  It  is  simply  a  state  of  life  ordained  by  God  for 
man's  benefit.  But  it  is  a  state  which  ought  never  to  be 
spoken  of  with  levity,  or  regarded  with  disrespect.  The 
Prayerbook  service  has  well  described  it,  as  "  an  honoura- 
ble estate,  instituted  of  God  in  the  time  of  man's  inno- 
cency,  and  signifying  unto  us  the  mystical  union  that  is 
betwixt  Christ  and  his  Church."  Society  is  never  in  a 
healthy  condition,  and  true  religion  never  flourishes  in 
that  land  where  the  marriage  tie  is  lightly  esteemed. 
They  who  lightly  esteem  it  have  not  the  mind  of  Christ. 
He  who  "  beautified  and  adorned  the  estate  of  matrimony 
by  His  presence  and  first  miracle  that  He  wrought  in 
Cana  of  Galilee,"   is   One  who   is   always   of  one  mind. 


89 

"  Marriage,"  snys  the  Holy  Ghost  by  St.  Panl,  "  is  hon 
ourable  in  all."  (Heb.  xiii.  4.) 

One  thing,  however,  ought  not  to  be  forgotten. 
Marriage  is  a  step  which  so  seriously  affects  the  temporal 
happiness  and  spiritual  welfare  of  two  immortal  sonls, 
that  it  ought  never  to  be  taken  in  hand  "  unadvisedly, 
lightly,  wantonly,  and  without  due  consideration."  To 
be  truly  happy,  it  should  be  undertaken  "reverently, 
discreetly,  soberly,  and  in  the  fear  of  God."  Christ's 
blessing  and  presence  are  essential  to  a  happy  w^edding. 
The  marriage  at  which  there  is  no  place  for  Christ  and 
His  disciples,  is  not  one  that  can  justly  be  expected  to 
prosper. 

We  learn,  secondly,  from  these  verses,  that  there  are  times 
when  it  is  lawful  to  be  merry  and  rejoice.  Our  Lord 
Himself  sanctioned  a  wedding-feast  by  His  own  presence. 
He  did  not  refuse  to  be  a  guest  at  "  a  marriage  in  Cana 
of  Galilee."  "A  feast,"  it  is  written,  "is  made  for 
laughter,  and  wine  maketh  merry."  (Eccles.  x.  19.) 
Our  Lord,  in  the  passage  before  us,  countenances  both 
the  feast  and  the  use  of  wine. 

True  religion  was  never  meant  to  make  men  melancholy. 
On  the  contrary,  it  was  intended  to  increase  real  joy  and 
happiness  among  men.  The  servant  of  Christ  unquestion- 
ably ought  to  have  nothing  to  do  with  races,  balls,  theatres, 
and  such-like  amusements,  which  tend  to  frivolity  and  dis- 
sipation, if  not  to  sin.  But  he  has  no  right  to  hand  over 
innocent  recreations  and  family  gatherings  to  the  devil  and 
the  world.  The  Christian  who  withdraws  entirely  from 
the  society  of  his  fellow-men,  and  walks  the  earth  with  a 
face  as  melancholy  as  if  he  was  always  attending  a  funeral, 
does  injury  to  the  cause  of  the  Gospel.  A  cheerful,  kindly 
spirit  is  a  great  recommendation  to  a  believer.  It  is  a 
positive  nusfortune  to  Christianity  when  a  Christian  cannot 
smUe.     A  merry  heart,  and  a  readiness  to  take  part  in  all 


90  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

innocent  mirth,  are  gifts  of  inestimable  value.  They  go 
far  to  soften  prejudices,  to  take  up  stumbling-blocks  out  of 
the  way,  and  to  make  way  for  Christ  and  the  Gospel. 

The  subject  no  doubt  is  a  difficult  and  delicate  one.  On 
no  point  of  Christian  practice  is  it  so  hard  to  hit  the  mean 
between  that  which  is  lawful  and  that  which  is  unlawful, 
between  that  which  is  right  and  that  which  is  wi'ong.  It 
is  very  hard  indeed  to  be  both  merry  and  wise.  High 
spirits  soon  degenerate  into  levity.  Acceptance  of  many 
invitations  to  feasts  soon  leads  to  waste  of  time,  and  begets 
leanness  of  soul.  Frequent  eating  and  drinking  at  other 
men's  tables,  soon  lowers  a  Christian's  tone  of  rehgion. 
Going  often  into  company  is  a  heavy  strain  on  spirituality 
of  heart.  Here,  if  anywhere,  God's  children  have  need  to 
be  on  their  guard.  Each  must  know  his  own  strength  and 
natural  temperament,  and  act  accordingly.  One  believer 
can  go  without  risk  where  another  cannot.  Happy  is  he 
who  can  use  his  Christian  liberty  without  abusing  it !  It 
is  possible  to  be  sorely  wounded  in  soul  at  marriage  feasts 
and  the  tables  of  friends. 

One  golden  rule  on  the  subject  may  be  laid  down,  the 
use  of  which  will  save  us  much  trouble.  Let  us  take  care 
that  we  always  go  to  feasts  in  the  spirit  of  our  divine 
Master,  and  that  we  never  go  where  He  would  not  have 
gone.  Like  Him,  let  us  endeavour  to  be  always  "  about 
our  Father's  business."  (Luke  ii.  49.)  Like  Him,  let  us 
willingly  promote  joy  and  gladness,  but  let  us  strive  that 
it  may  be  sinless  joy,  if  not  joy  in  the  Lord.  Let  us  en- 
deavour to  bring  the  salt  of  grace  into  every  company,  and 
to  drop  the  word  in  season  in  every  ear  we  address.  Much 
good  may  be  done  in  society  by  giving  a  healthy  tone  to 
conversation.  Let  us  never  be  ashamed  to  show  our 
colours,  and  to  make  men  see  whose  we  are  and  whom  we 
serve.  "We  may  well  say,  ''Who  is  sufficient  for  these 
things?"     But  if  Christ  went  to  a  marriage  feast  in  Cana 


JOHN,    CHAP.    II.  91 

there  is  surely  something  that  Christians  can  do  on  similar 
occasions.  Let  them  only  remember  that  if  they  go  where 
their  Master  went,  they  must  go  in  their  Master's  spirit. 

We  learn  lastly,  from  these  verses,  the  Ahnighty  poioer 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  "We  are  told  of  a  miracle  which 
He  wrought  at  the  marriage  feast,  when  the  wine  failed, 
By  a  mere  act  of  will  He  changed  water  into  wine,  and  so 
supplied  the  need  of  all  the  guests. 

The  manner  in  which  the  miracle  was  worked  deserves 
especial  notice.  We  are  not  told  of  any  outward  visible 
action  which  preceded  or  accompanied  it.  It  is  not  said 
that  He  touched  the  waterpots  containing  the  water  that 
was  made  wine.  It  is  not  said  that  He  commanded  the 
water  to  change  its  qualities,  or  that  He  prayed  to  His 
Father  in  Heaven.  He  simply  willed  the  change,  and  it 
took  place.  We  read  of  no  prophet  or  apostle  in  the  Bible 
who  ever  worked  a  miracle  after  this  fashion.  He  who 
could  do  such  a  mighty  work,  in  such  a  manner,  was  no- 
thing less  than  very  God. 

It  is  a  comfortable  thought  that  the  same  almighty 
power  of  will  which  our  Lord  here  displayed  is  still  exer- 
cised on  behalf  of  His  believing  people.  They  have  no 
need  of  His  bodily  presence  to  maintain  their  cause. 
They  have  no  reason  to  be  cast  down  because  they  can- 
not see  Him  with  their  eyes  interceding  for  them,  or  touch 
Him  with  their  hands,  that  they  may  cling  to  Him  for 
safety.  If  He  "  wills  "  their  salvation  and  the  daily  sup- 
ply of  all  their  spiritual  need,  they  are  as  safe  and  well 
provided  for  as  if  they  saw  Him  standing  by  them. 
Christ's  will  is  as  mighty  and  effectual  as  Christ's  deed. 
The  will  of  Him  who  could  say  to  the  Father,  "  I  will 
that  they  whom  thou  hast  given  me  be  with  me  where  I 
am,"  is  a  will  that  has  all  power  in  heaven  and  earth,  and 
must  prevail.  (John  xvii.  24.) 

Happy  are  those  who,  like  the  disciples,  believe  on  Him 


92  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

by  whom  this  miracle  was  wrought.  A  greater  marriage 
feast  than  that  of  Cana  will  one  day  be  held,  when  Christ 
Himself  will  be  the  bridegroom  and  believers  will  be  the 
bride.  A  greater  glory  will  one  day  be  manifested,  when 
Jesus  shall  take  to  Himself  His  great  power  and  reign. 
Blessed  will  they  be  in  that  day  who  are  called  to  the 
narriage  supper  of  the  Lamb  !  (Rev.  xix.  9.) 

Notes.  .John  H.  1 — 11. 

1. — [The  third  day.}  The  question  naturally  arises,  "  What  day 
was  this  ?  From  what  day  was  it  the  third  ?"  The  most  pro- 
bable answer  is,  that  it  was  the  third  day  after  the  last  event 
described  in  the  preceding  chapter,  the  third  day  after  Nathanael 
was  brought  to  Jesus  and  became  a  disciple.  The  meaning 
therefore  is,  "  The  third  day  after  the  conversation  between 
Jesus  and  Nathanael." 

[A  marriage  in  Oana.]  Let  it  be  remembered,  that  we  are 
told  elsewhere  that  Nathanael  was  an  inhabitant  of  Cana.  (John 
xxi.  2.)  This  makes  it  far  from  improbable,  that  Nathanael, 
after  he  became  a  disciple,  invited  our  Lord  to  visit  the  place 
where  he  lived.  Cana  is  a  place  not  mentioned  in  the  Old 
Testament.  Robinson,  in  his  Biblical  Researches,  says  it  was  a 
village  about  three  hours'  journey  from  Nazareth. 

[The  mother  of  Jesus  was  there.]  We  must  suppose  that  the 
Virgin  Mary  was  in  some  way  connected  with  the  bride  or 
bridegroom,  and  was  therefore  present  at  the  marriage  and  as- 
sisting in  the  arrangements  of  the  feast.  Without  some  such 
supposition  it  is  difficult  to  understand  her  speaking  to  the  ser- 
vants, as  she  afterwards  does. 

The  absence  of  Joseph's  name,  both  here  and  in  other  places 
where  the  mother  of  our  Lord  is  mentioned  in  the  Gospels  and 
Acts,  has  induced  most  commentators  to  think  that  Joseph  was 
dead  when  our  Lord  began  His  public  ministry.  Tlie  point  is 
one  of  which  we  know  nothing  except  by  conjecture.  It  de- 
serves notice,  however,  that  the  Jews  of  Capernaum  speak  of 
Jesus  as  "  the  ?on  of  Joseph,  whose  fathei^  and  mother  we  know^ 
(John  vi.  42  )  IP  it  had  been  profitable  to  us  to  know  more 
about  Jo>eph,  we  should  have  been  told  more.  The  Roman 
Catholic  Church  has  already  given  him  a  superstitious  reverence, 
upon  the  authority  of  tradition,  and  withput  the  slightest  war- 
rant of  Scripture.  What  would  have  not  been  said  about  Joseph 
by  the  Romish  Churo,h,  if  he  had  been  more  prominently  men- 
tioned in  God's  Word  ? 


JOHN,    CHAP.    II.  93 

Lighlfool  points  out  that  a  comparison  of  Mark  iii.  18,  Mark 
vi.  3,  and  John  xix.  25,  makes  it  exceedingly  probable  that  the 
Virgin  Mary's  sister,  called  elsewhere  Mary,  the  wife  of  Clcophas 
or  Alfheus,  and  all  her  family,  lived  at  Cana.  He  observes,  that 
in  the  list  of  our  Lord's  "  brethren  "  or  cousins  we  find  the  follow- 
ing names, — James,  Joses,  Juda,  and  Simon.  Of  these  he  thinks 
that  James,  Juda,  and  Simon  were  apostles.  James  tt  e  apostle 
is  expressly  called  "  the  brother  of  our  Lord,"  and  the  son  of 
Alpheus,  and  Jude  is  expressly  called  brother  of  this  James 
(Gal.  i.  19;  Jude  1.)  The  remaining  brother,  Simon,  he  think 
was  the  apostle  who  is  called  Simon  the  Canaanite.  This,  Light- 
foot  argues,  is  a  proof  that  his  father  and  mother  lived  at  Cana ; 
and  hence  he  concludes  that  this  marriage  feast  was  in  the  house 
of  Alpheus.  That  Alpheus  and  Cleophas  were  th-e  same  person 
is  a  general  and  well-founded  opinion. 

2. — [Jesus  was  called.,  .disciples.']  Our  Lord  was  doubtless  invited 
as  the  Virgin  Mary's  son.  His  disciples  were  invited  as  His 
friends  and  companions.  We  cannot,  of  course,  suppose,  at  so 
early  a  period  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  that  He  was  recognized  as 
a  religious  teacher,  or  those  with  Him  as  disciples  of  a  new 
faith.  The  disciples  here  spoken  of  must  be  the  five  mentioned 
in  the  last  chapter,  viz.,  Andrew  and  his  companion,  (probably 
John.)  Simon  Peter,  Philip,  and  Nathanael. 

{To  the  marriage^  We  know  nothing  about  the  names  of  the 
bride  and  bridegroom.  There  is  a  legend  among  Romish  writers 
that  the  bridegroom  was  John  the  apostle,  and  that  though 
married,  John  left  wife  and  home  at  once,  in  order  to  become 
Christ's  disciple  !  The  whole  story  is  utterly  destitute  of  Scrip- 
tural foundation,  and  a  tissue  of  improbabilities.  Baronius 
conjectures  that  the  bridegroom  was  Simon  the  Canaanite,  but 
witliout  any  proof  worth  mentioning. 

Let  it  be  noted,  that  the  presence  of  Jesus,  and  His  disciples, 
and  the  Virgin  Mary  at  a  marriage,  is  a  significant  fact,  which 
stands  out  in  strong  contrast  to  the  Patristic  and  Roman  Catholic 
doctrine,  of  the  imperfection  of  the  state  of  marriage  compared 
to  that  of  celibacy.  "  Forbidding  to  marry  "  is  a  doctrine  of 
Antichrist,  not  of  Christ.  (1  Tim.  iv.  3.) 

The  Roman  Catholic  argument,  that  Christ,  by  His  presence, 
made  marriage  a  sacrament,  is  utterly  worthless.  Dyke  remarks 
that  we  might  ns  well  call  feasts  and  burials  sacraments,  because 
Christ  was  pre-^ent  at  them.  He  says,  "  There  is  required  a  word 
of  institution  to  make  a  sacrair.ent.  Let  the  Papists  show  any 
such  word  here  used.  And  if  Christ  did  make  marriaj,e  a  sacra- 
ment, why  do  they  call  it  a  work  of  the  flesh  ?  Are  saciaments 
works  of  the  fle.sh  ?  " 


94  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

The  suggestion  of  some  modern  writers,  that  our  Lord's  pre- 
sence at  a  marriage  feast  condemns  those  Christians  who  decline 
to  go  to  such  amusements  as  balls,  and  routs,  and  dancing-parties, 
has  no  weight  in  it  at  all.  The  objects  for  which  people  meet 
together  at  a  marriage  feast  and  at  a  ball  are  widely  different. 
The  one  is  a  mere  irrehgious  assembly  for  pleasure  and  recrea- 
tion of  a  very  questionable  tendency,  entailing  late  hours,  and 
ministering  to  worldliness,  levity,  and  the  love  of  display.  The 
other  is  a  gathering  of  friends  to  witness  the  most  important  step 
in  life  that  two  persons  can  take,  and  a  gathering  closely  con- 
nected with  a  religious  ceremony. 

3. — [  When  they  wanted  ivine.']  The  Greek  words  so  rendered  mean 
literally,  "  Wine  having  failed."  This  circumstance  probably 
shows  the  poor  and  humble  condition  of  those  to  whose  marriage 
Jesus  was  invited.  His  acquaintances  and  those  of  His  mother 
were  not  wealthy  persons. 

It  throws  light  on  this  expression,  and  indeed  on  the  whole 
story,  to  remember  that  a  marriage  feast  among  the  Jews  was  often 
an  affair  of  several  days'  duration,  and  an  occasion  when  many 
were  invited.  Consequently  it  entailed  not  only  much  expense, 
but  a  considerable  consumption  of  food  and  wine.  Thus  Sam- 
son's marriage  feast  lasted  seven  days.  (Judges  xv.  10—18.) 
Thus  the  marriage  fea^t  described  in  the  par,.ble  of  the  King's 
Son,  was  a  feast  which  large  numbers  were  invited  to  attend. 
(Matt.  xxii.  2,  &c.)  This  being  the  case,  we  may  well  understand 
that  in  the  feasts  of  those  who  were  not  wealthy  the  wine  might 
soon  run  short,  without  there  having  been  any  excess  of  drinking. 
So  it  seems  to  have  happened  in  the  case  before  us. 

[^TTie  mother  of  Jesus.... saith.... no  wine.]  This  little  sentence 
has  given  rise  to  various  and  strange  interpretations. 

Some  have  thought,  as  Bengel.  that  Mary  suggested  to  our 
Lord  that  it  was  time  for  Him  and  His  disciples  to  depart  and 
leave  the  feast,  in  order  to  spare  the  feelings  of  the  bride  and 
bridegr  >om,  and  to  avoid  exposing  their  poverty. 

Some  have  thought,  as  Calvin,  that  she  wished  our  Lord  to 
occupy  the  minds  of  the  guests  by  profitable  discourse,  and  so 
to  take  off  their  attention  from  the  deficiency  of  wine. 

By  far  the  most  reasonable  and  probable  idea  is,  that  Mary 
conjectured  that  our  Lord  might  in  some  way  supply  the  de- 
ficiency of  wine.  How  it  would  be  done  she  could  not  tell. 
There  is  not  the  slightest  ground  for  supposing  that  our  Lord 
had  ever  worked  a  miracle  up  to  this  time.  But  it  wculd  be 
foolish  to  suppose  that  Mary  did  not  remember  well  all  the  mi- 
raculous I  ireumstances  of  our  Lord's  birth,  and  all  the  words 


JOHN,    CHAP.    II.  95 

spoken  before  by  the  angel  Gabriel  concerning  Him. — "We  cannot 
doubt,  that  altho  jgh  our  Lord  had  lived  a  quiet  li'e  at  Nazareth  for 
thirty  \  ears,  and  done  no  miracles,  His  motlier  must  have  observed 
in  Him  a  per''ection  of  word  and  deed  utterly  unlike  the  behaviour 
of  common  men. — We  cannot  doubt  that  she  was  aware  of  all 
the  events  of  the  la?t  few  weeks, — our  Lord's  baptism  by  John, 
John's  public  proclamation  of  JELim  as  the  Messiah,  and  the 
gatheiini^  around  Jesr.s  of  a  small  knot  of  disciples. — Remem- 
bering all  these  thing-,  we  surely  need  not  wonder  that  Marv'a 
expectations  were  greatly  raised.  She  looJ<:ed  for  her  Son  speedily 
doing  some  great  mir:icle.  She  was  in  daily  expectation  that 
He  would  prove  Himself  the  Messiah  by  some  mighty  act.  And 
it  was  under  these  feelings  that  she  turned  to  Him,  saying, 
"  They  have  no  wine."  It  is  as  though  she  said, — "  Surely  the 
time  is  come  for  declaring  thyself.  Manifest  thy  power,  as  I 
have  long  expected  thee  to  do,  by  providing  a  supply  of  wine." 

The  argument  which  the  Roman  Catholics  draw  from  this 
expression  in  favour  of  the  Virgin  Mary's  intercession  in  heaven 
for  sinners,  and  the  consequent  lawfulness  of  praying  to  her,  is 
utterly  worthless,  and  most  unhappy.  For  one  thing,  it  does  not 
follow,  because  the  petitions  of  living  saints  are  heard  upon  earth, 
that  the  petitions  of  dead  saints  in  heaven. are  effectual.  For 
another  thing,  it  is  an  unfortunate  fact,  that  this  petition,  the 
only  one  that  we  ever  find  addressed  to  our  Lord  by  the  Virgin 
Mary,  brought  from  Him  an  immediate  rebuke !  Men  must  be 
in  great  straits  for  an  argument  when  they  can  reason  in  this 
way  in  defence  of  the  invocation  of  saints ! 

^Melancthon,  Chemnitius,  and  others,  think  that  this  want  of 
wine  at  the  marriage  feast  is  purposely  mentioned  in  order  to 
remind  married  persons,  or  those  who  intend  marriage,  that 
matrimony  brings  with  it  cares  as  well  as  comforts,  and  specially 
cares  from  poverty.  They  that  marry  do  well,  and  with  Christ's 
blessmg  will  have  happiness.  But  they  must  not  expect  to 
escape  "  trouble  in  the  flesh "  from  the  very  day  of  marriage. 
(1  Cor.  vii.  28.) 

i. — [Jesus  saith,  Woman,  what,  &c.,  <fec.]  This  remarkable  verse 
has  naturally  attracted  great  attention.  In  interpreting  it,  it  is 
very  important  to  avoid  the  extremes  into  which  some  Protest- 
ants and  nearly  all  Roman  Cathohc  writers  have  fallen,  in  their 
interpretations. 

On  the  one  side  we  must  not  lay  too  much  stress  on  the  ex- 
pression "  Woman."  It  is  surely  a  mistake  to  suppose,  as.  Calvin 
and  (t'ners  suggest,  that  it  conveys  any  reproof,  or  is  anywise 
inconsistent  with  reverence  and  respect.  The  very  same  ex- 
pression was  used  by  our  Lord  when  He  addressed  His  mother 
for  the  last  time  on  the  cross,  and  aflfectionatedy  commended  her 


96  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

to  John's  care.  He  said,  "  Woman,  behold  thy  son."  (John 
xix.  26.)  The  Yirgm  Mary  was  an  erring  woman,  hke  all  other 
believing  women,  but  we  must  not  lay  more  blame  on  her  than 
Scripture  warrants. 

On  the  other  side,  it  is  useless  to  deny  that  our  Lord's  words 
were  intended,  as  Chrysostom,  Theophylact,  and  Euthymius  say, 
to  be  a  rebuke  to  Mary.  She  erred  here,  perhaps  from  aflfection- 
ate  desire  to  bring  honour  to  her  Son,  as  she  erred  on  other 
occasions.  The  words  before  us  were  meant  to  remind  her,  that 
she  must  henceforth  leave  our  Lord  to  choose  His  own  times  and 
modes  of  acting.-  The  season  of  subjection  to  her  and  Joseph 
was  over.  The  season  of  his  public  ministry  had  at  length 
begun.  In  carrjing  on  that  ministry,  she  must  not  presume  to 
suggest  to  Him.  The  utter  contrariety  of  this  verse  to  the 
teaching  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  about  the  Virgin  Mary 
is  too  palpable  to  be  explained  away.  She  was  not  without 
error  and  sin,  as  Romish  writers  have  dared  to  assert,  and  was 
not  meant  to  be  prayed  to  and  adored.  If  our  Lord  would  not 
allow  His  mother  even  to  suggest  to  Him  the  working  of  a  mira- 
cle, we  may  well  suppose  that  aU  Roman  Catholic  prayers  to  the 
Virgin  Mary,  and  especially  prayers  entreating  her  to  "  command 
her  Son,"  are  most  offensive  and  blasphemous  in  His  eyes. 

The  Greek  expression,  rendered  "what  have  I  to  do  Avith 
thee,"  would  be  translated  literally,  "what  to  me  and  thee?" 
It  is  an  elliptical  expression,  of  which  the  full  meaning  probably 
is,  "What  is  there  in  common  to  me  and  thee  ?  "  "  My  thoughts," 
as  Bengel  says,  "  are  one  thing,  and  thine  another." — It  is  the 
same  phrase  that  is  used  in  an  interrogative  form  in  Matt.  viii. 
29 ;  Mark  i.  24,  v.  7 ;  Luke  viii  28 ;  and  in  an  imperative  form  in 
Matt,  xxvii.  19. 

[Mine  hour  is  not  yet  come.]  The  simplest  and  most  reason- 
able view  of  these  words  is  to  refer  them  to  Christ's  "hour"  or 
time  for  working  a  miracle.  It  is  like  the  expression,  "  my  time 
is  not  yet  full  come."  (John  vii.  8.)  Our  Lord  did  not  tell  Mary 
that  He  would  not  work  a  miracle.  But  He  would  have  her 
know  that  she  roust  not  expect  Him  to  do  mighty  works  to 
please  His  relatives  after  the  flesh.  He  would  only  work  a 
miracle,  upon  this  or  any  other  occasion,  when  the  fitting  season 
f3r  it,  the  time  appointed  in  God's  counsel,  had  arrived. 

There  is  a  curious  idea  maintained  by  Augustine,  Wordsworth, 
and  others,  that  our  Lord  here  referred  to  the  hour  of  His  cruci- 
fixion, and  that  He  meant,  "  My  hour  is  not  yet  come  for  recog 
nizing  thee  and  honouring  thee  publicly  as  my  mother,  but  1 
shall  do  it  one  day  on  the  cross."  This  however  seems  a  very 
far-fetched  and  improbable  application  of  the  words. 


97 

L. — [His  mother  saUh.,.do  it]  Two  tilings  are  very  noteworthy  in 
this  verse.  One  is  the  meekness  v^^ith  which  the  Yiigin  Mary 
submitted  to  the  gentle  rebuke  which  came  from  our  Lord's 
mouth,  in  the  last  verse.  The  other  is  the  firm  faith  which  she 
still  exhibited  in  our  Lord's  power  to  work  a  miracle  in  order  to 
supply  the  lack  of  wine,  and  in  the  probability  of  His  working 
it. 

Dyke  observes,  "  The  direction  which  Mary  gives  to  the  ser 
vants  belongs  to  us  all.  We  must  perform  simple  obedience  to 
Christ  in  all  things  ;  His  sayings  mu^t  be  our  doings.  No  rea- 
soning of  the  matter  must  there  be,  no  inquiry,  as  into  men's 
commandments  and  speeches ;  but  this  must  suffice,  '  Christ  hath 
said  it.'  This  is  the  bhnd  obedience  which  Jesuits  yield  to  their 
superiors,  but  it  is  the  obedience  that  belongs  to  Christ.  Many 
will  do  something  that  Christ  says,  but  not  whatsoever  He  says." 

It  is  not,  perhaps  going  too  far  to  say,  that  after  observing 
her  Son's  perfect  life  and  perfect  wisdom  during  tliirty  years  at 
Nazareth,  Mary  spoke  the  words  before  us  with  special  confidence, 
and  with  a  greater  depth  of  meaning  than  appears  on  the  sur- 
face of  the  sentence. — "Whatsoever  He  says  deserves  attention. 
Whatsoever  He  says,  do  it." — At  any  rate  the  verse  contains  a 
deep  practical  lesson  for  the  whole  Church  of  Christ.  Whatso- 
ever Christ  says,  let  us  obey  and  do. 

G.  —[Six  water-pots... .after  the  manner. ...Jews.]  St.  John  mentions 
these  details  in  describing  the  miracle,  with  a  special  reference 
to  Gentile  readers.  He  meant  them  to  understand  that  there 
was  nothing  remarkable  in  the  circumstance  that  there  were  six 
large  water-pots  of  stone  in  the  place  where  the  feast  was  held. 
The  peculiar  customs  of  the  Jews  about  ceremonial  washings 
and  purifyings,  made  it  necessary  to  have  a  large  supply  of 
water  at  hand.  The  words  of  St.  Mark  throw  light  on  the  verse 
before  us : — "  The  Pharisees,  and  all  the  Jews,  except  they  wash 
their  hands  oft,  eat  not,  holding  the  tradition  of  the  elders,"  &c. 
(Mark  vii.  3,  &c.)  The  presence  of  the  six  water-pots,  therefore, 
could  not  arise  from  coUusion  or  pre-arrangement.  It  was  a 
natural  consequence  of  Jewish  habits  in  our  Lord's  times. 

[Two  or  three  firlins  apiece.]  Many  fooHsh  and  unprofitable 
r^-niarks  have  been  built  on  this  expression,  as  to  the  very  large 
quantity  of  wine  w^hich  our  Lord  must  have  created  when  the 
miracle  we  are  considering  was  wrought.  It  might  suffice  to 
reply  that  there  is  much  uncertainty  about  th5  precise  quantity 
of  liquid  which  the  ancient  measure,  which  we  here  render 
"  firkins,"  contained.  But  the  best  and  safest  answer  is,  that  we 
must  not  measure  the  demands  of  a  Jewish  marriage  feast,  which 
perhaps  lasted  several  days,  and  included  a  large  number  of 
guests,  by  the  feasts  of  our  own  times. 

5 


98  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

7. — [J£sus  saith....fll  the  water-pots,  dc]  The  remark  is  frequently 
made  Dy  commentators  on  this  verse,  \vith  much  propriety,  that 
these  simple  words  describe  the  duty  of  all  who  woik  for  Christ, 
and  especially  of  ministers  and  teachers.  They  aie  to  hear 
Christ's  voice,  and  do  as  He  tells  them,  and  then  leave  the  result 
to  Him.  Duties  are  ours.  Events  are  God's.  It  is  ours  to  fill 
the  water-pots.     It  is  Christ's  to  make  the  water  wine. 

[Up  to  the  hrim.]  This  circumstance  is  no  doubt  mentioned 
in  order  to  show  that  there  was  no  room  left  for  trick,  jugglery, 
or  imposture.  What  was  put  into  the  water-pots  was  water,  and 
only  water,  and  they  were  so  filled  that  nothing  could  be  infused, 
or  mingled  with  their  contents. 

8. — [And  he  saith...draw  out  now.]  It  was  at  this  moment,  no 
doubt,  that  the  miracle  took  place.  By  an  act  of  will  our  Lord 
changed  the  contents  of  the  water-pots.  That  which  was  poured 
in  was  water.  That  which  was  drawn  out  was  wine.  To  Him 
who  created  the  vine  and  made  it  bear  grapes  at  the  first,  the 
change  was  perfectly  easy.  He  who  could  create  matter  out  of 
nothing,  could  much  more  easily  change  one  kind  of  matter  into 
another. 

[The  governor  of  the  feast.]  Thi&  person  appears  to  have  been 
one  who  presided  at  large  entertainments  like  that  before  us, 
and  superintended  all  the  proceedings.  The  Greek  word  so 
rendered,  is  precisely  the  same  as  that  translated  "  ruler  of  the 
feast,"  in  the  following  verse.  The  presence  of  such  a  person 
at  feasts  was  a  well-known  custom  among  the  Greeks  and 
Eomans. 

9. — [Tasted... wine... Ten ew  not  whence  it  was.]  The  testimony  of  the 
ruler  of  the  feast  is  specially  adduced,  in  order  to  show  the 
reality  of  the  miracle.  He  knew  nothing  of  what  had  been 
done  to  the  water-pots.  He  had  not  seen  the  water  poured  in 
by  our  Lord's  command.  There  was  no  collusion  or  conspiracy 
between  him  and  the  servants,  much  less  between  him  and  our 
Lord.  Hence  the  value  of  his  testimony.  He  not  only  testifies 
that  the  liquid  which  a  few  minutes  before  was  water  was  now 
wine,  but  that  it  was  also  wine  of  more  than  common  goodness 
and  strength, — not  wine  mixed  with  water,  but  pure,  good 
wine. 

Let  the  word  "  tasted  "  be  carefully  noticed  in  this  place.  It 
supplies  a  strong  incidental  argument  against  the  Romish  doctrine 
of  transubsfantiation.  The  occasion  before  us  is  the  only  known 
occasion  on  which  our  Lord  changed  one  liquid  into  another. 
When  He  did  so  change  it,  the  reality  of  the  change  was 
at  once  proved  by  the  "taste."  Why  is  it  then  that  in  ihe 
oretended  change  of  the  sacramental  wine  in  the  Lord's  Supper 


JOHN,  CHAP.  ir.  99 

into  Christ's  blood  the  change  cannot  be  detected  by  the  senses? 
Why  does  the  wine  after  consecration  tasle  Hke  wine,  jus'  as  it 
did  before? — These  are  questions  which  the  Roman  Caihohcs 
rannot  satisfactorily  answer.  The  pretended  change  of  the  bread 
and  wine  in  the  Lord's  Supper  is  a  complete  delusion.  It  is 
contradicted  by  the  senses  of  every  communicant.  The  bread 
after  consecration  is  still  bread,  and  the  wine  is  still  wine.  That 
which  contradicts  our  senses  we  are  nowhere  required  in  God's 
Word  to  beHeve. 

10, — {Every  man  at  the  heginning,  d;c.]  The  words  in  this  sentence 
must  not  be  pressed  too  closely,  in  order  to  bring  out  of  them  a 
spiritual  meaning.  The  ruler  of  the  feast  makes  a  general  remark 
about  the  way  in  which  banquets  were  usually  managed.  The 
ordinary  custom  was  to  bring  the  best  wine  first,  and  the  inferior 
wine  last.  But  the  wine  before  him,  drawn  from  the  water-pots, 
was  so  singularly  good,  that  the  custom  of  this  day  seemed 
reversed.  The  verse  is  a  strong  incidental  testimony  to  the 
reality  and  greatness  of  our  Lord's  miracle.  Not  only  did  He 
change  water  into  wine,  but  into  wine  so  singularly  good  as  to 
excite  remark  and  attention. 

[  When  men  have  weU  drunk.]  Foohsh  remarks  have  sometimes 
been  made  on  this  expression,  as  if  our  Lord  had  countenanced 
excessive  drinking  on  this  occasion.  For  one  thing,  it  may  be 
remarked  that  the  Greek  word  rendered  "  have  well  drunk,"  does 
not  necessarily  imply  intoxication.  It  may  be  justly  interpieted, 
as  Schleusner  and  Parkhurst  observe,  "have  drunk  sufficiently, 
or  drunk  freely." — Men  who  have  had  enough,  are  indifferent  as 
to  the  quality  of  the  wine  set  before  them.  For  another  thing, 
we  must  remember  that  the  ruler  of  the  feast  was  only  making 
a  general  remark  about  men's  ordinary  customs  in  supplying 
wine  to  their  guests.  There  is  nothing  whatever  to  show  that 
he  was  alluding  to  the  guests  actually  before  him. 

[Thou  hast  kept  the  good  wine  until  noiv.]  A  good  practical 
remark  has  often  been  raised  from  these  words  of  the  ruler  of 
the  feast.  The  world  gives  its  best  things,  like  the  best  wine, 
first,  and  its  worst  things  last.  The  longer  we  serve  the  w^orld, 
the  more  disappointing,  unsatisfactory,  and  unsavoury  will  its 
gifts  prove,  Christ,  on  the  other  hand,  gives  His  servimts  their 
best  things  last.  They  have  first  the  cross,  the  race,  and  the 
battle,  and  then  the  rest,  the  glory,  and  the  crown.  Specially 
will  it  be  found  true  at  his  second  advent.  Then  will  believers 
say  emphatically,  "  Thou  hast  kept  the  good  wine  until  now." 
These  are  pious  and  useful  thoughts.  But  it  may  be  doubted 
whether  they  are  more  than  accommodations. 

This  is  perhaps  the  proper  place  to  remark,  that  it  seems 
utterly  impossible,  on  any  fair  and  honest  interpretation,  to  re- 


100  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

concile  the  passage  before  us  with  the  leading  principles  of  whs* 
is  commonly  called  "  Teetotalism,"  If  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
actually  worked  a  miracle  in  order  to  supply  wine  at  a  marriage 
feast,  ic  seems  to  me  impossible,  by  any  ingenuity,  to  prove  that 
drinking  wine  is  sinful.  Temperance  in  all  things  is  one  of  the 
fruits  of  the  Spirit.  An  intemperate  man  is  an  unconverted 
man.  Total  abstinence  from  fermented  liquors  is  in  many  cases 
most  useful  and  desirable.  But  to  say,  as  many  do  say,  that  to 
drink  any  fermented  liquor  at  all  is  '"  a  sin,"  is  taking  up  ground 
that  cannot  be  maintained  in  the  face  of  the  passage  before  us, 
without  wresting  the  plain  meaning  of  Scripture,  and  charging 
Christ  with  abetting  sin. 

)  . — [TJiis  heginning  of  miracles,  t&c]  The  plain  meaning  of  this 
sentence  seems  to  be  that  this  was  the  first  miracle  which  cur 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  ever  worked.  The  miracles  which  some  have 
reported  that  He  worked  in  His  infancy  and  childhood,  are 
destitute  of  the  slightest  foundation  in  Scripture,  and  utterly 
unworthy  of  credit.  Those  who  wish  to  see  their  absurdity  will 
find  specimens  of  them  in  the  preliminary  Essay  to  Trench's 
Notes  on  Miracles. 

Lightfoot  suggests  the  five  following  reasons  why  the  miracle 
now  before  us  was  purposely  the  first  that  Christ  worked.  1.  As 
marriage  was  the  first  institution  ordained  by  God,  so  at  a 
marriage  was  Christ's  first  miracle.  2.  As  Christ  had  showed 
Himself  miraculous  a  little  while  ago  by  a  fast,  so  He  doth  now 
by  an  extraordinary  provision  at  a  fea'>t.  When  He  would  not 
make  stones  bread,  it  was  not  because  He  could  not.  3.  He 
would  not  make  stones  into  bread  to  satisfy  Satan,  but  He  was 
willing  to  turn  water  into  wine  to  show  forth  His  own  glory. 
4.  The  first  miracle  wrought  in  the  world  by  man  was  transfor- 
mation, (Exod.  vii.  9,)  and  the  first  miracle  wrought  by  the  Son 
of  Man  was  of  the  same  nature.  5.  The  first  time  you  hear  of 
John  the  Baptist,  you  hear  of  his  strict  diet,  and  so  the  first  time 
you  hear  of  Christ  in  His  public  ministry,  you  hear  of  Him  at  a 
marriage  feast. 

\^}fanifested  forth  his  glory.]  I  am  unable  to  see  that  those 
words  refer  to  the  expression  used  in  the  first  chapter,  "  We  be- 
held his  glory."  (Jonn  i.  14.)  I  believe  the  meaniag  to  be  that 
"  by  this  miracle  Jesus  now  for  the  first  time  opened  or  revealed 
His  glorious  and  divine  power,  and  His  commission  to  be  the 
Messiah."  After  thirty  years'  seclusion  at  Nazxreth,  He  now 
for  the  first  time  hfted  up  the  veil  which  He  h  id  thrown  over 
His  divinity  in  becoming  flesh,  and  revealed  so  nething  of  His 
almighty  power  and  Grodhead. 

[His  disciples  believed  on  him.]  These  words  cannot  of  cc  urse 
rcican  that  Arndew,  and  John,  and  Peter,  and  Philip,  and  Na- 


JOHN,    CHAP.   II.  101 

thanael  now  believed  on  Jesus  for  the  first  time.  The  probable 
meaning  is,  that  from  this  time  forth  they  believed  more  confi- 
dently, more  implicitly,  and  more  unhesitatingly.  From  this  time 
they  felt  thorougly  convinced,  in  spite  of  much  remaining  igno- 
rance, that  He  whom  they  were  following  was  the  Messiah. 

I  cannot  close  the  note  or  this  wonderful  miracle  without 
saying  something  about  the  allegorical  and  typical  meanings 
assigned  to  it  by  the  fathers  and  many  other  commentators. 
Many  see  in  the  miracle  an  allegorical  history  of  the  introduction 
of  the  Grospel  into  the  world.  Like  the  marriage  feast,  the 
Gospel  was  an  occasion  of  joy.  As  at  the  marriage  feast,  the 
personal  presence  of  Jesus  was  the  great  feature  of  the  Gospel. 
The  times  of  the  Jewish  dispensation  were  times  of  deficiency 
and  dim  light.  The  coming  of  Christ  supplied  all  that  was 
lacking.  Revealed  religion  before  Christ  was  like  water.  Christ 
coming  into  the  world  turned  the  water  of  the  old  dispensation 
into  wine.  The  good  wine  was  reserved  until  the  time  of  Christ. 
The  first  miracle  wrought  by  Moses  was  turning  water  into 
blood.     The  first  wrought  by  Christ  was  turning  water  into  wine. 

These  are  undoubtedly  pious  thoughts,  and  full  of  truth.  I 
should  be  sor  y  to  speak  harshly  of  them,  or  to  pronounce  de- 
cidedly that  they  may  not  be  legitimately  deduced  from  the 
miracle.  I  only  venture  the  remark,  that  it  is  far  wiser  to 
abstain  from  allegorical  interpretations  as  a  general  rule,  and 
to  be  content  with  the  plain  meaning  which  appears  on  the  sur- 
face of  Scripture.  Once  begin  allegorizing  Scripture,  and  you 
never  know  where  you  are  to  stop.  You  may  prove  anything, 
and  find  anything  in  the  Bible  upon  the  allegorical  system,  and 
at  last  throw  open  the  floodgate  to  a  torrent  of  wild  fanaticism. 

The  allegorical  lessons  drawn  from  this  miracle  by  Augustine, 
Bernard,  and  Alcuin,  are  striking  examples  of  the  extremes  into 
M'^hich  allegory  may  run.  When  such  a  man  as  Augustine,  for 
instance,  tells  us  that  the  two  or  three  firkins  mean  the  two 
races  of  men,  Jews  and  Greeks,  or  the  three  sons  of  Noah, — or 
when  he  says  that  the  six  water-pots  in  the  miracle  before  us 
denote  six  successive  prophetical  periods  in  the  days  between 
Adam  and  Christ,  one  cannot  but  feel  that  there  is  something 
wrong.  These  are  his  words,  "The  six  water-pots,  containing 
two  or  three  firkins  apiece,  are  six  ages,  containing  the  prophecy 
belonging  to  all  nations,  whether  as  referred  to  two  kinds  of 
men,  Jews  and  Gentiles,  as  the  apostle  often  says,  or  to  three, 
on  account  of  the  three  sons  of  Noah."  The  system  of  inter- 
preting Scripture  which  can  lead  a  good  man  into  such  assertions 
as  this,  must  surely  be  a  dangerous  two-edged  weapon,  and 
likely  to  do  more  harm  than  good. 

That  all  our  Lord's  miracles  were  deeply  significant,  I  do  not 


102 


EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 


deny.  Tnat  all  were  intended  to  convey  deep  spiritual  lessons, 
beside  supplying  proofs  of  His  divinity,  I  make  no  question. 
All  I  maintain  is  that  they  require  reverent  and  delicate  Landling, 
and  that  to  rush  hastily  into  allegorical  interpretations  of  them, 
and  invest  every  minute  portion  of  them  with  a  figurative  mean- 
ing, is  an  unwise  mode  of  handling  Scripture,  and  eminently 
calculated  to  bring  the  Bible  into  contempt. 

Hardly  any  commentator  has  drawn  more  useful  practical 
lessons  Irom  this  miracle  than  Melancthon.  Those  who  think 
lightly  of  Protestant  divinity  would  do  well  to  compare  his  com- 
mentary on  the  whole  passage  with  that  of  Augustine. 


JOHN  n.  12—25, 


12  After  this  he  went  down  to 
Capernaum,  he,  and  his  mother,  and 
his  brethren,  and  his  disciples :  and 
they  continued  there  not  many  days. 

13  And  the  Jews'  Passover  was 
at  hand,  and  Jesus  went  up  to  Je- 
rusalem. 

14  And  found  in  the  temple  those 
that  sold  oxen  and  sheep  and  doves, 
and  the  changers  of  money  sitting : 

15  And  when  he  had  made  a 
scourge  of  small  cords,  he  drove 
them  all  out  of  the  temple,  and  the 
sheep,  and  the  oxen:  and  poured 
out  the  changers'  money,  and  over- 
threw the  tables ; 

1 6  And  said  unto  them  that  sold 
doves.  Take  these  things  hence; 
make  not  my  Father's  house  an 
house  of  merchandise. 

11  And  his  disciples  remembered 
that  it  was  written.  The  zeal  of 
thine  house  hath  eaten  me  up. 

18  Then  answered  the  Jews  and 
iaid  :mtc  him,  "What  sign  shewest 
thoi.  unto  us,  seeing  that  thou  do- 
est  these  things  ?  I 

The  second  miracle  which  our  Lord  is  recorded  to  have 
wrought  demands  our  attention  in  these  verses.  Like  the 
fii'st  miracle  at  Cana,  it  is  eminently  typical  and  significant 


19  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto 
them,  Destroy  this  temple,  and  in 
three  days  I  will  raise  it  up. 

20  Then  said  the  Jews,  Forty 
and  six  years  was  this  temple  in 
building,  and  wilt  thou  rear  it  up 
in  three  days? 

21  But  he  spake  of  the  temple 
of  his  body. 

22  When  therefore  he  was  risen 
from  the  dead,  his  disciples  remem- 
bered that  he  had  said  this  unto 
them ;  and  they  believed  the  Scrip- 
ture, and  the  word  which  Jesus  had 
said. 

23  Now  when  he  was  in  Jerusa- 
lem, at  the  Passover,  in  the  feast 
day,  many  believed  in  his  name, 
when  they  saw  the  miracles  which 
he  did. 

24  But  Jesus  did  not  commit 
himself  unto  them,  because  he 
knew  all  men, 

25  And  needed  not  that  any 
should  testify  of  man :  for  he  knev? 
what  was  in  man. 


JOHN,    CHAP.   II.  103 

ot  things  yet  to  come.  To  attend  a  marriage  feast,  and 
cleanse  the  temple  from  profanation  were  among  the  first 
acts  of  our  Lord's  ministry  at  His  first  coming.  To  purify 
the  whole  visible  Church,  an4  hold  a  marriage  supper,  will 
be  amongst  His  first  acts,  when  He  comes  again. 

We  see,  for  one  thing,  in  this  passage,  liow  much  Christ 
disapproves  all  irreverent  behaviour  in  the  house  of  God. 

We  are  told  that  He  drove  out  of  the  temple  those 
whom  He  found  selling  oxen  and  sheep  and  doves  within 
its  walls, — that  He  poured  out  the  changers'  money  and 
overthrew  their  tables, — and  that  He  said  to  them  that 
sold  doves,  "  take  these  things  hence,  make  not  my 
Father's  house  an  house  of  merchandise."  On  no  occasion 
in  our  Lord's  earthly  ministry  do  we  find  Him  acting  so 
energetically,  and  exhibiting  such  righteous  indignation, 
as  on  the  occasion  now  before  us.  Nothing  seems  to  have 
called  from  Him  such  a  marked  display  of  holy  wrath  as 
the  gross  irreverence  which  the  priests  permitted  in  the 
temple,  notwithstanding  all  their  boasted  zeal  for  God's 
law.  Twice,  it  will  be  remembered.  He  discovered  the 
same  profanation  of  His  Father's  house  going  on,  within 
three  years,  once  at  the  beginning  of  His  ministry  and 
once  at  the  end.  Twice  we  see  Him  expressing  his  dis- 
pleasure in  the  strongest  terms.  "  The  thing  is  doubled  '* 
in  order  to  impress  a  lesson  more  strongly  on  our  minds. 

The  passage  is  one  that  ought  to  raise  deep  searchings 
of  heart  in  many  quarters.  Are  there  none  who  profess 
and  call  themselves  Christians,  behaving  every  Sunday 
just  as  badly  as  these  Jews  ?  Are  there  none  who  secretly 
bring  into  the  house  of  God  their  money,  their  lands,  their 
houses,-  their  cattle,  and  a  whole  train  of  worldly  affairs? 
Are  there  none  who  bring  their  bodies  only  into  the  place 
of  worship,  and  allow  their  hearts  to  wander  into  the 
ends  of  the  earth?  Are  there  none  who  are  "almost  in 
all  evil,  in  the  midst  of  the  congregation?"  (Prov.  v.  14.) 


104  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

These  are  serious  questions  !  Multitudes,  it  may  be  feared, 
could  not  give  them  a  satisfactory  answer.  Christian 
churclies  and  chapels,  no  doubt,  are  very  unlike  the  Jew- 
ish temjile.  They  are  not  built  after  a  divine  pattern. 
They  have  no  altars  or  holy  places.  Their  furniture  has 
no  typical  meaning.  But  they  are  places  where  God's 
word  is  read,  and  where  Christ  is  specially  present.  The 
man  who  professes  to  worship  in  them  should  surely 
behave  with  reverence  and  respect.  The  man  who  brings 
his  worldly  matters  with  him  when  he  professes  to  wor- 
ship, is  doing  that  which  is  evidently  most  offensive  to 
Christ.  The  words  which  Solomon  wrote  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  are  applicable  to  all  times,  "  Keep  thy  foot  when 
thou  goest  to  the  house  of  God."  (Eccles.  v.  1.) 

We  see,  for  another  thing,  in  this  passage,  how  men  may 
remember  words  of  religious  truth  long  after  they  are  spok- 
en^ and  may  one  day  see  a  meaning  in  them  which  at  first 
they  did  not  see. 

We  are  told  that  our  Lord  said  to  the  Jews,  "  Destroy 
this  temple  and  in  three  days  I  will  raise  it  up."  St.  John 
informs  us  distinctly  that  "  He  spake  of  the  temple  of  His 
body,"  that  he  referred  to  His  own  resurrection.  Yet 
the  meaning  of  the  sentence  was  not  understood  by  our 
Lord's  disciples  at  the  time  that  it  was  spoken.  It  was 
not  till  ''  He  was  risen  from  the  dead,"  three  years  after 
the  events  here  described,  that  the  full  significance  of  the 
sentence  flashed  on  their  hearts.  For  three  years  it  was  a 
dark  and  useless  saying  to  them.  For  three  years  it  lay 
sleeping  in  their  minds,  like  a  seed  in  a  tomb,  and  bore  no 
fruit.  But  at  the  end .  of  that  time  the  darkness  passed 
away.  Tliey  saw  the  application  of  their  Master's  words, 
and  as  they  saw  it  were  confirmed  in  their  faith.  "They 
remembered  that  He  had  said  this,"  and  as  they  remem- 
bered "  they  believed." 

It  is  a  comfortable  and  cheering  thought,  that  the  same 


JOHN",    CHAP.   II.  105 

kind  of  thing  tliat  happened  to  the  disciples  is  often  going 
on  at  the  present  day.  The  sermons  that  are  preached  to 
apparently  heedless  ears  in  churches,  are  not  all  lost  and 
thrc  Tvn  away.  The  instruction  that  is  given  in  schools 
and  pastoral  visits,  is  not  all  wasted  and  forgotten.  The 
texts  that  are  taught  by  parents  to  children  are  not  all 
taught  in  vain.  There  is  often  a  resurrection  of  sermons, 
and  texts,  and  instruction,  after  an  interval  of  many  years. 
The  good  seed  sometimes  springs  up  after  he  that  sowed 
it  has  been  long  dead  and  gone.  Let  preachers  go  on 
preaching,  and  teachers  go  on  teaching,  and  parents  go  on 
training  up  children  in  the  way  they  should  go.  Let  them 
sow  the  good  seed  of  Bible  truth  in  faith  and  patience. 
Their  labour  is  not  in  vain  in  the  Lord.  Their  words  are 
remembered  far  more  than  they  think,  and  will  yet  spring 
up  "after  many  days."  (1  Cor.  xv.  58  ;  Eccles.  xi.  1.) 

"We  see,  lastly,  in  this  passage,  how  perfect  is  our  Lord 
Jesus  Ghrisfs  knowledge  of  the  human  heart. 

We  are  told  that  when  our  Lord  was  at  Jerusalem,  the 
first  time,  He  "did  not  commit  Himself"  to  those  who 
professed  belief  in  Him.  He  knew  that  they  were  not  to 
be  depended  on.  They  were  astonished  at  the  miracles 
which  they  saw  Him  work.  They  were  even  intellectually 
convinced  that  He  was  the  Messiah,  whom  they  had  long 
expected.  But  they  were  not  "disciples  indeed."  (John 
viii.  31.)  They  were  not  converted,  and  true  believers. 
Their  hearts  were  not  right  in  the  sight  of  God,  though 
their  feelings  were  excited.  Their  inward  man  was  not 
renewed,  whatever  they  might  profess  with  their  lips.  Our 
Lord  knew  that  nearly  all  of  them  were  stony-ground  hear- 
ers. (Luke  viii.  13.)  As  soon  as  tribulation  or  persecu- 
tion arose  because  of  the  word,  their  so-called  faith  would 
probably  wither  away  and  come  to  an  end.  All  this  our 
Lord  saw  clearly,  if  others  around  Him  did  not.  Andrew, 
and  Peter,  and  John,  and  Philip,  and  Nathanael,  perhaps 

5* 


106  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

wondered  that  their  Master  did  not  receive  these  seeming 
believers  with  open  arms.  But  they  could  only  judge 
things  by  the  outward  appearance.  Their  Master  could 
read  hearts.     "  He  knew  what  was  in  man." 

The  truth  now  before  us,  is  one  which  ought  to  make 
hypocrites  and  false  professors  tremble.  They  may  de- 
ceive men,  but  they  cannot  deceive  Christ.  They  may 
wear  a  cloak  of  religion,  and  appear,  like  whited  sepul- 
chres, beautiful  in  the  eyes  of  men.  But  the  eyes  of 
Christ  see  their  inward  rottenness,  and  the  judgment  of 
Christ  will  surely  overtake  them,  except  they  repent. 
Christ  is  already  reading  their  hearts,  and  as  He  reads  He 
is  displeased.  They  are  known  in  heaven,  if  they  are  not 
known  on  earth,  and  they  will  be  known  at  length  to  their 
shame,  before  assembled  worlds,  if  they  die  unchanged. 
It  is  written,  "  I  know  thy  works,  that  thou  hast  a  name 
that  thou  livest,  and  art  dead."  (Rev.  iii.  1.) 

But  the  truth  before  us  has  two  sides,  like  the  pillar  of 
cloud  and  fire  at  the  Red  sea.  (Exod.  xiv.  20.)  If  it  looks 
darkly  on  hypocrites,  it  looks  brightly  on  true  believers. 
If  it  threatens  wrath  to  false  professors,  it  speaks  peace  to 
all  who  love  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  sincerity.  A  real 
Christian  may  be  weak,  but  he  is  true.  One  thing,  at  any 
rate,  the  servant  of  Christ  can  say,  when  cast  down  by  a 
sense  of  his  own  infirmity,  or  pained  by  the  slander  of  a 
lying  world.  He  can  say,  "  Lord,  I  am  a  poor  sinner,  but 
I  am  in  earnest,  I  am  true.  Thou  knowest  all  things  :  thou 
knowest  that  I  love  thee.  Thou  knowest  all  hearts,  and 
thou  knowest  that,  weak  as  my  heart  is,  it  is  a  heart  that 
cleaves  to  thee."  The  false  Christian  shrinks  from  the  eye 
of  an  all-seeing  Saviour.  The  true  Christian  desires  his 
Lord's  eye  to  be  on  him  morning,  noon,  and  night.  Ho 
has  notliing  to  hide. 


JOHN-,    CHAP.   II.  107 


Notes.     John  II.  12 — 25. 

J2. — [Re  went  down  to  Capernaum.]  The  strict  accuracy  of  John'a 
writing  is  note-worthy  here.  Cana  was  a  village  in  the  hill 
country.  Capernaum  was  a  town  on  the  shore  of  the  lake  of 
Galilee,  at  a  very  much  lower  level  than  Cana.  It  is  therefore 
said  that  Jesus  "  went  downy 

Capernaum  appears  to  have  been  our  Lord's  principal  residence 
in  Galilee  during  his  earthly  ministry.  "  Leaving  Nazareth,  he 
dwelt  in  Capernaum."  (Matt.  iv.  13.)  At  no  place  does  He  seem 
to  have  worked  so  many  miracles ;  and  on  no  place  does  He  de- 
nounce so  severe  a  judgment  for  its  impenitence  and  neglect  of 
privileges  :  "  Thou  Capernaum  which  art  exalted  to  heaven  shalt 
be  cast  down  to  hell."  (Matt.  xi.  23.)  It  is  a  striking  fact  that 
though  Capernaum  was  a  wealthy  and  important  place  in  our 
Lord's  time,  it  has  so  entirely  passed  away  and  been  "  cast  down," 
that  even  its  situation  has  never  been  clearly  ascertained. 

[His  mother.]  Here  again  we  see  no  mention  of  Joseph. 
Whether  the  Virgin  Mary  was  a  constant  companion  of  our  Lord 
throughout  His  earthly  ministry,  may  be  doubted.  We  see  her 
here.  We  see  her  again  at  the  crucifixion.  But  we  see  her  in 
another  place  "  standing  without  and  desiring  to  speak  with 
him  "  when  He  was  talking  to  the  people,  and  giving  occasion  to 
the  solemn  saying,  "  Who  is  my  mother  ?"  (Matt.  xii.  46.)  In- 
deed there  is  no  proof  that  Mary  ever  saw  more  clearly  than  the 
rest  of  our  Lord's  disciples  the  whole  purpose  of  Christ's  advent, 
or  was  at  all  more  prepared  than  the  rest  for  His  crucifixion  and 
sufferings. 

[His  brethren.]  There  is  no  good  ground  for  supposing  that 
these  were  our  Lord's  brethren  according  to  the  flesh,  and  that 
Mary  ever  had  any  other  son  after  our  Lord's  miraculous  birth. — 
For  one  thing,  it  is  well  known  to  every  careful  reader,  that  the 
word  "brethren"  is  apphed  in  the  Bible  to  many  relatives  be- 
sides those  whom  we  call  "  brethren."  Abraham  says  to  Lot, 
"  We  be  brethren,"  (Gen.  xiii,  8,)  though  Lot  was  his  nephew. 
Mishael  and  Elzaphan  were  called  the  "  brethren  "  of  Nadab  and 
Abihu,  though  they  were  only  cousins.  (Lev.  x.  4.) — Jacob  said 
"  to  his  brethren  "  gather  stones  (Gen.  xxxi.  46) ;  yet  they  were 
his  sons  and  servants. — For  another  thing,  it  is  quite  possible 
that  Joseph  might  have  had  children  by  a  former  marriage,  be- 
fore he  was  espoused  to  the  Virgin  Mary  ;  and  these  children,  we 
can  well  understand,  wou'd  be  called  our  Lord's  "  brethren." — In 
the  last  place,  we  know  that  the  Apostle  James  was  called  oui 
''  Lord's  brother,"  (Gal.  i.  19,)  and  yet  we  are  distinctly  told  that 
he  was  the  son  of  Alpheus  or  Cleophas,  the  husband  of  the  Vir- 
gin Mary's  sister.     It  is  therefore  most  probable  that  "  brethren" 


108  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

in  the  verse  before  us  means  "  cousins,"  some  of  whom  believed 
on  our  Lord,  though  others  did  not.  (John  vii.  5.) 

Tj  is  an  interesting  fact,  that  two  at  least  of  our  Lord's  apostlea 
were  His  kinsmen  according  to  the  flesh,  viz.,  James  and  Jude, 
the  sons  of  Alpheus.  To  them  w^e  may  probably  add  Simon,  on 
the  strength  of  Mark  vi.  3,  and  perhaps  Matthew  also,  on  the 
strength  of  Mark  ii.  14  and  Matthew  ix.  9. 

[And  his  disciples.']  This  expression,  being  used  after  the 
words  "  His  brethren,"  may  raise  a  doubt  whether  any  of  our 
Lord's  relatives  as  yet  believed  on  Him,  except  the  Virgin  Mary. 
It  is  possible  that  they  only  followed  Him  now  out  of  curiosity, 
in  consequence  of  the  miracle  he  had  just  wrought. 

13. — [The  Jews^  passover...at  hand.]  This  expression  is  another 
proof  that  St.  John  wrote  his  Gospel  for  Gentile  believers  rather 
than  for  Jews. 

Our  Lord's  regular  attendance  on  the  feasts  and  ordinances  of 
the  law  of  Moses,  deserves  notice.  So  lorig  as  the  dispensation 
of  the  Old  Testament  lasted,  He  gave  it  all  due  honour,  how- 
ever unworthy  the  hands  which  administered  it.  The  unvvor- 
thiness  of  ministers  wiU  not  justify  us  in  neglecting  God's  ordi- 
nances. 

The  exact  number  of  Passovers  which  our  Lord  kept,  and  con- 
sequently the  exact  length  of  His  ministry  from  His  baptism  to 
His  crucifixion,  are  points  on  which  there  is  much  difference  of 
opinion.  For  myself  I  can  see  no  better  view  than  the  old  one, 
that  our  Lord's  ministiy  lasted  three  years.  It  evidently  began 
shortly  before  a  Passovei-,  and  ended  with  a  Passover.  But 
whether  it  included  only  three  Passovers,  and  in  that  case  lasted 
between  two  and  three  years, — or  four  Passovers,  and  in  that 
case  lasted  between  three  and  four  years, — I  think  we  have  no 
materials  for  deciding  positively.  If  I  must  venture  an  opinion, 
I  think  it  most  likely  that  our  Lord  only  kept  three  Passovers. — 
But  it  is  an  open  question,  and  one  happily  not  of  deep  moment. 
— Three  Passovers  are  distinctly  named  by  John,  viz.,  the  one 
before  us,  the  one  in  the  sixth  chapter,  (John  vi.  3.,)  and  the  one 
at  which  our  Lord  was  crucified.  If  the  ''feast"  mentioned  in 
the  fifth  chapter  (John  v.  1,)  was  the  Passover,  our  Lord  kept 
four  Passovers.     But  this  last  point  cannot  be  settled. 

Sir  Isaac  Newton  thought  that  our  Lord  kept  no  less  than  five 
Passovers.  Some  few  writers  have  maintained  that  He  kept 
only  two.  Those  who  wish  to  see  the  subject  discussed  will  ^nd 
it  in  Doddridge's  notes  on  this  place. 

[Jesus  went  up  to  Jerusalem.]  Let  it  be  noted,  that  th's  jour- 
ney, and  all  the  circumstances  which  attended  this  visit  to  Jeru- 


JOHN,   CHAP.   II.  109 

salem,  are  only  related  by  St.  John.  For  some  wise  reason  the 
other  three  G-ospel  writers  were  inspired  to  leave  out  this  part 
of  our  Lord's  history. 

H. — [Found  in  the  temple  those  that  sold,  <&c.]  The  presence  of 
oxen,  sheep,  doves,  and  money-changers,  within  the  temple 
courts,  is  easily  accounted  for.  The  animals  were  intended  to 
supply  the  wants  of  Jews  who  came  to  the  Passover  and  other 
feasts,  from  distant  places,  and  required  sacrifices.  For  them 
the  dealers  in  oxen,  sheep,  and  doves,  were  ready,  within  a  few 
yards  of  the  altar.  The  changers  of  money  came  naturally 
enough  where  buying  and  selling  went  on,  to  meet  the  conve- 
nience of  Jews  who  had  nothing  but  foreign  money,  which  they 
wished  to  exchange  for  the  current  coin  of  Jerusalem.  The 
tendency  of  the  whole  custom  was  evidently  most  profane.  It 
was  no  doubt  connived  at  by  the  priests  from  covetous  motives. 
They  were  either  connected  with  those  who  sold  animals  and 
changed  money,  and  shared  in  their  profits ;  or  else  they  re- 
ceived a  rent  for  the  privilege  of  carrying  on  business  within  the 
sacred  walls.  No  doubt  they  would  have  pleaded  that  all  was 
done  with  a  good  intention !  Their  end  was  to  provide  facilities 
for  worshipping  Grod  !  But  good  intentions  cannot  sanctify  un- 
scriptural  actions.  As  Dyke  says  on  the  passage,  ''No  pretence 
of  good  ends  can  justify  that  which  is  forbidden  by  G-od." 

When  we  are  told  that  our  Lord  found  all  this  going  on  '*  in 
the  temple,"  we  must  of  course  understand  that  it  means  "  in 
the  courtyards  surrounding  the  temple, — within  the  precincts  of 
the  temple."  But  these  courtyards,  we  must  remember,  were 
regarded  as  part  of  the  temple,  and  therefore  holy  ground. 

I  am  inclined  to  see  in  this  visit  of  our  Lord  to  the  temple  at 
His  first  appearance  in  Jerusalem  after  beginning  His  ministry,  a 
partial  though  very  imperfect  fulfilment  of  Malachi's  prophecy : 
"  The  Lord  whom  ye  seek  shaU  suddenly  come  to  his  temple." 
(Mai.  iii.  1.)  While  the  Jewish  nation  was  expecting  the  ap- 
pearance of  a  conquering  Messiah  with  power  and  great  glory, 
the  true  Messiah  suddenly  appeared  in  the  temple,  and  declared 
His  presence,  not  by  exhibiting  temporal  power,  but  b}^  insisting 
on  greater  purity  in  the  temple  worship,  as  the  first  thing  which 
the  nation  needed. 

That  a  fuller  and  more  complete  accomplishment  of  Malachi's 
words  remains  yet  to  come,  I  feel  no  doubt.  But  like  many  Old 
Testament  prophecies  about  Messiah,  the  words  were  purposely 
intended  to  have  a  double  fulfilment, — a  partial  one  at  Messiah's 
first  coming  to  suffer,  a  complete  one  at  Messiah's  second  coming 
to  reign. 

The  great  majority  of  the  best  comment ators  hold  that  our 
Lord  cast  out  the  buyers  and  sellers  from  the  temple  twice,  once 


110  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

at  the  beginning  of  His  ministry  and  once  at  the  end. — -It  ia 
fair  to  say  that  Bishop  Pearce  and  a  few  other  writers  think  that 
it  only  happened  once, — at  the  end  of  His  ministry,  just  before 
His  crucifixion.  Bat  the  arguments  in  favor  of  this  view  do 
not  appear  to  me  at  all  weighty  or  satisfactory. 

15. — [Made  a  scourge  of  small  cords.]  The  Greek  word  translated 
"  small  cords,"  means  literally  a  "  cord  made  of  rushes,"  Some 
have  thought  that  these  rushes  were  used  as  Htter  for  the  sheep 
and  oxen.  Others  have  thought  that  such  small  cords  as  these 
might  very  hkely  have  been  lying  about,  after  having  been 
used  for  tying  up  the  oxen.  Whether  the  scourge  was  applied 
to  those  persons  who  brought  the  animals  into  the  temple,  as  a 
sort  of  chastisement,  as  some  old  painters  have  represented  the 
scene,  we  do  not  know.  The  more  probable  view  seems  to  be, 
that  the  scourge  was  simply  meant  to  assist  our  Lord  in  speedily 
ejecting  the  sheep  and  oxen. 

The  whole  transaction  is  a  remarkable  one,  as  exhibiting  our 
Lord  using  more  physical  exertion,  and  energetic  bodily  action, 
than  we  see  Him  using  at  any  other  period  of  His  ministry.  A 
word,  a  touch,  or  the  reaching  forth  of  a  hand,  are  the  ordinary 
limits  of  His  actions.  Here  we  see  Him  doing  no  less  than 
four  things : — (1)  Making  the  scourge ; — (2)  Driving  out  the 
animals  ; — (3)  Pouring  out  on  the  ground  the  changers'  money ; 
— (4)  Overthrowing  the  tables.  On  no  occasion  do  we  find  Him 
showing  such  strong  outward  marks  of  indignation,  as  at  the 
sight  of  the  profanation  of  the  temple.  Remembering  that  the 
whole  transaction  is  a  striking  type  of  what  Christ  will  do  to 
His  visible  church  at  His  second  coming,  we  may  get  some  idea 
of  the  deep  meaning  of  that  remarkable  expression,  "  The  wrath 
of  the  Lamb."  (Rev.  vi.  16.) 

A  remark  of  Dyke  on  our  Lord's  conduct  in  this  place,  is 
worth  noticing.  "  This  act  of  Christ  is  not  to  be  drawn  into 
imitation,  because  He  did  it  as  Lord  of  the  temple  by  virtue  of 
His  Sonship.  Therefore  the  Papists  grossly  abuse  this  place 
that  hence  gather  the  power  of  the  Pope  to  punish  offenders 
even  with  corporal  punishments,  or  to  deprive  princes  of  their 
kingdoms.  As  for  ministers,  the  only  whip  they  may  use  is  their 
tongue,  in  powerful  preaching  against  abuses. — As  for  private 
persons,  God  hath  not  tied  their  tongues,  though  He  hath  their 
hands.  As  occasion  is  ofiered,  they  may  show  their  detestation 
and  dislike  of  corruption." 

10. — [Said... .sold  doves.. ..take  these  things  hence.]  The  distinction 
between  our  Lord's  mode  of  dealing  with  each  of  the  obiects  of 
His  displeasure  deserves  notice.  The  oxen  and  sheep  He  drove 
out.  There  was  no  danger  of  their  beirg  lost  by  such  treatment. 
— The  money  He  th7'ew  on  the  ground.     It  might  be  soon  picked 


Ill 

tip  and  carried  away. — The  doves  He  simply  ordered  to  be  talcen 
away.  Had  He  done  more,  they  might  have  flown  away,  and 
been  completely  lost  to  their  owners. — It  would  have  been  well 
for  the  church,  if  all  church  reformers  had  blended  like  wisdom 
with  a  like  zeal  in  their  proceeding?.  In  the  present  instance  all 
were  rebuked  and  all  instructed.  But  no  one  was  really  injured, 
and  nothing  was  lost. 

[i/y  Father's  house.']  This  expression  is  note-worthy.  Whether 
the  Jews  observed  it,  in  the  hurry  and  confusion  of  the  whole 
transaction,  may  be  questioned.  It  was  evidently  an  assertion  by 
our  Lord  of  His  divine  Sonship,  and  consequently  of  his  right  to 
vindicate  the  purity  of  His  Father's  place  of  worsliip.  On  another 
occasion  when  our  Lord  called  God  His  Father,  the  Jews  at 
once  said  that  He  "  made  himself  equal  with  God."  (John  v.  18.) 
Some  have  thought  that  the  expression  is  parallel  to  that  used 
in  the  description  of  Christ  among  the  doctors,  (Luke  ii.  49.)  and 
that  the  words  used  there,  *  I  must  be  about  my  Father's  business," 
would  have  been  better  rendered,  "  I  must  be  in  my  Father's 
house." 

The  fact  that  the  profane  custom  which  our  Lord  here  re- 
proved was  resumed  by  the  Jews,  and  that  two  or  three  years 
afterward  our  Lord  found  the  same  thing  going  on  again  in 
the  temple,  and  again  cast  out  the  buyers  and  sellers,  ought  not 
to  be  overlooked.  It  is  a  striking  proof  of  the  desperate  wicked- 
ness and  fallen  condition  of  the  priests  and  rulers  of  the  temple. 
They  were  deaf  to  all  counsel  and  reproof,  and  given  over  to 
a  reprobate  mind. — The  difference  between  our  Lord's  language 
at  the  second  visit  and  that  used  at  the  first,  ought  also  to  be 
noticed.  At  the  first  visit  He  only  says,  "  Make  not  my  Father's 
house  a  house  of  merchandise,"  a  place  of  buying  and  selling. 
At  the  second  visit  He  says,  "  Ye  have  made  it  a  den  of  thieves." 
(Matt.  xxi.  13.)  The  more  wicked  and  hardened  men  are,  the 
louder  must  be  our  protest,  and  the  sharper  our  rebuke. 

[A  house  of  merchandise.]  Musculus  remarks  on  this  ex- 
pression, that  if  the  sale  of  animals  for  sacrifices  called  forth 
Christ's  displeasure,  much  more  must  He  be  displeased  at  what 
goes  on  continually  in  Roman  Cathohc  Churches,  The  sale  of 
masses,  indulgences,  &c.,  must  be  far  more  ofifensive  to  Christ 
than  the  sale  of  oxen  and  sheep. 

The  complete  success  of  our  Lord  on  this  occasion,  and  the  ab- 
sence of  the  slightest  opposition  on  the  part  of  the  Jews,  deserve 
notice.  It  is  a  fact  that  induced  some  of  the  Fathers  to  call  this 
the  greatest  miracle  Christ  ever  worked.  There  are  however 
three  things  to  be  remembered  in  considering  this  matter.  For 
one  thing,  the  conscience  of  the  Jews  was  on  our  Lord's  side. 
They  knew  that    lie  was  right  and   they   were  wrong.     For 


112  EXPOSITOKY  IHOUGHTS. 

another  thing,  as  a  nation  familiar  with  the  history  of  the  Old 
Testament  Prophets,  they  ^vould  not  be  surprised  at  an  indi- 
vidual apparently  under  a  divine  impulse  suddenly  doing  what 
our  Lord  did. — Above  all  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  a  divine 
influence  was  brought  to  bear  on  all  present,  as  it  was  when  out 
Lord  rode  into  Jerusalem  on  an  ass,  and  when  He  caused  Hia 
enemies  in  the  garden  to  "  go  backward  and  fall  to  the  ground," 
(Malt.  xxi.  9,  10  ;  John  xviii.  6.)  Here,  as  on  other  occasions,  our 
Lord  showed  His  disciples  that  He  had  complete  power  over  all 
wills  and  minds,  when  He  thought  fit  to  exercise  it;  and  that 
when  He  was  rejected  and  disobeyed  by  the  Jews,  it  was  not 
because  He  had  no  power  to  compel  obedience.  They  had  no 
power  against  Him  except  when  He  permitted. 

The  allegorical  meanings  assigned  to  the  sheep,  oxen,  and 
doves,  by  Augustine,  Origen,  and  Bede,  are  too  absurd  to  be 
quoted.  They  may  be  seen  in  the  Catena  of  Aquinas.  Origen 
sees  in  the  casting  out  of  the  animals,  a  type  of  the  dissolution 
of  the  Jewish  dispensation  with  its  offerings  and  sacrifices. 

Beza  sees  a  peculiar  fitness  in  our  Lord's  action  of  purifying 
the  temple.  It  became  Him  who  was  to  be  our  Prophet,  Priest, 
and  King,  to  exhibit  the  same  zeal  for  the  purity  of  Grod's  house 
that  was  formerly  exhibited  by  such  men  as  the  Prophet  Isaiah, 
the  priest  Jehoiada,  and  the  kings  Hezekiah  and  Josiali.  (2 
Chron.  xxiv.  16.) 
17. — [Sis  disciples  remembered,  Sc.']  These  words  certainly  appear 
to  mean  that  our  Lord's  disciples  "remembered"  the  text  which 
is  here  quoted,  at  the  very  time  when  our  Lord  was  casting  out 
the  buyers  and  sellers.  It  occurred  to  their  minds  as  a  striking 
illustration  of  the  spirit  which  their  divine  Master  was  exhibit- 
ing. He  was  completely  absorbed  for  the  moment  in  zeal  for 
the  purity  of  Grod's  house.  It  is  one  among  many  proofs  of  the 
familiarity  of  the  poor  and  unlearned  Jews  with  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Scriptures.  Whether,  however,  the  disciples  regarded  the 
Psalm,  of  which  they  remembered  this  verse,  as  applicable  to 
the  Messiah,  may  be  reasonably  doubted. 

[ITie  zeal  of  thine  house... .eaten  me.]  The  69th  Psalm,  from 
whi^h  this  text  is  taken,  is  quoted  no  less  than  seven  times  in 
the  New  Testament,  as  the  utterance  of  Messiah.  In  the  first 
twenty-one  verses  of  the  Psalm  the  Messiah's  sufferings  are  related 
by  Himself.  The  fifth  verse  is  undoubtedly  very  remarkable  as 
coming  from  Messiah's  lips,  when  He  speaks  of  "  my  foohshness" 
and  "my  sins."  Ainsworth  says  it  means,  "false  imputation  of 
sins."  '*  Thou  knowest  if  there  be  any  such  as  my  foes  charge 
me  with.'"'     Bonar  says  much  the  same. 

The  text  before  us  shows  that  it  is  sometimes  justifiable  to  be 
entirely  absorbed  and  eaten  up,  so  to  speak,  by  zeal  for  some 


JOHN,    CHAP.    IT.  113 

object  in.  Avhich  God's  glory  is  concerned.  Mose?,  Phineas,  and 
Paul  at  Athens,  are  examples  of  such  zeal.  (Exodus  xxxii.  19 ; 
Numbers  xxv.  11  ;  Acts  xvii.  16.) 

Augustine  remarks  on  this  text,  "  Let  the  zeal  of  the  house  of 
God  ever  eat  thee. — For  example :  Seest  thou  a  brother  running 
to  the  theatre  ?  stop  him,  warn  him,  be  grieved  for  him,  if  the 
zeal  of  Grod's  house  hath  now  eaten  thee. — Seest  thou  others 
running  and  wanting  to  drink  themselves  drunk  ?  Stop  whom 
thou  canst,  hold  whom  thou  canst,  frighten  whom  thou  canst; 
whom  thou  canst,  win  in  gentleness;  do  not  in  any  wise  sit  still 
and  do  nothing." 

18. — [Then  answered  the  Jews  and  said.']  Doddridge  remarks  here 
that  these  Jews  were  probably  the  rulers,  because  the  G-reat 
Assembly,  or  Sanhedrim,  sat  in  the  temple,  and  our  Lord's 
actions  would  undoubtedly  come  to  their  knowledge  without 
delay.  This  makes  the  question  and  answer  which  follow  the 
more  important, 

[  What  sign  showest  thou....doest  these  things.}  This  question 
of  the  Jews  shows  us  that  they  admitted  the  lawfulness  of  a 
man  doing  such  things  as  our  Lord  had  done,  if  he  could  prove 
that  he  had  a  divine  commission.  He  had  suddenly  taken  upon 
Himself  a  great  and  independent  authority.  Though  neither  a 
priest  nor  a  Levite,  He  had  virtually  interfered  with  the  man- 
agement of  the  temple  courts.  Let  Him  now  show  that  He  was 
a  prophet,  like  Elijah  or  Amos,  and  they  would  concede  He  had 
a  warrant  for  His  conduct. 

19 — [Jesus  answered.. ..destroy  this  temple.]  The  meaning  of  this 
remarkable  expression  is  either  hypothetical  or  prophetical.  It 
must  either  be  rendered,  "  Supposing  you  destroy  this  temple," 
or  "Ye  will  destroy  this  temple," — "If  ye  kill  my  body,"  or 
'*  When  ye  shall  kill  my  body." — It  is  of  course  absurd  to  sup- 
pose that  our  Lord  literally  commanded  the  Jews  to  destroy 
Him.  The  use  of  the  imperative  instead  of  the  future,  must 
surely  be  familiar  to  every  Bible  reader.  See  especially  the 
109th  Psalm.  In  the  present  case  it  is  truly  astonishing  that 
any  one  can  see  difficulty  in  our  Lord's  expression.  He  only 
used  a  mode  of  speaking  which  is  in  common  use  among  our- 
selves. If  a  lawyer  said  to  his  cUent  in  a  consultation,  "  Take 
such  a  step,  and  you  will  be  ruined,"  we  all  know  that  he  would 
not  be  commanding  his  client  to  take  the  step.  He  would  only 
mean,  "If  you  do  take  such  a  step." — A  similar  form  of  lan- 
guage may  be  seen  in  our  Lord's  words,  "  Fill  ye  up  the  mea- 
sure of  your  fathers,"  addressed  to  the  Pharisees.  (Matt,  xxiii. 
32.)  No  one  would  sny  that  our  Lord  commanded  the  Phari- 
sees tc  do  this.  It  is  a  prophecy. — So  also,  "  Make  the  tree 
good,"  (Matt.  xii.  33,)  is  not  so  much  a  command  as  an  hypo- 
thesis.    See  also  Isai.  viii.  9,  10. 


114  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

[In  three  days  I  will  raise  it  up.]  This  is  a  prophecy  of  our 
Lord's  resurrection.  Bat  it  is  a  very  remarkable  one,  from 
the  fact  that  our  Lord  distinctly  asserts  His  own  power  to  raise 
Himself  up.  It  is  like  the  expression,  ''  I  have  power  to  lay 
down  my  life,  and  I  have  power  to  take  it  again."  (John  x.  18.) 
Both  the  expressions  deserve  particular  notice,  because  many 
now-a-days  assert  that  our  Lord's  resurrection  was  owing  to 
the  operation  of  God  the  Father  and  of  G-od  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
that  He  did  not  rise  by  His  own  power.  This  is  a  dangerous 
heresy.  That  the  Father  and  the  Holy  Ghost  co-operated  in  the 
resurrection  of  our  Lord's  body  there  can  be  no  doubt.  It  is 
clearly  'taught  in  many  places.  But  to  say  that  our  Lerd  did 
not  raise  his  own  body,  is  to  contradict  the  text  before  us,  and 
the  other  which  has  been  already  quoted. 

Hurrion,  quoted  by  Ford,  observes,  '*  The  efficient  cause  of 
Christ's  resurrection  was  the  infinite  power  of  God,  which  being 
common  to  all  the  Persons  m  the  blessed  Trinity,  the  resurrec- 
tion is  sometimes  ascribed  to  the  Father,  sometimes  to  the  Son, 
and  sometimes  to  the  Holy  Ghost.  Christ's  being  raised  by  the 
Father  and  the  Spirit  is  not  inconsistent  with  His  raising  Him- 
Belf ;  for  '  what  things  soever  the  Father  doeth,  these  also  doeth 
the  Son,'  (John  v.  19,)  for  being  one  in  nature,  they  are  also  one 
in  operation." 

The  questions  naturally  arise  in  many  minds,  Why  did  Jesus 
not  work  some  miracle  at  once,  as  a  sign,  to  convince  the  Jews  ? 
Why  did  He  not  at  once  proclaim  Himself  the  Mes.siah  ?  Why 
did  he  give  the  Jews  so  dark  and  mysterious  a  reply  as  the  one 
before  us? — The  answer  to  these  questions  is  this.  For  one  thing 
we  must  remark,  it  was  a  leading  principle  in  our  Lord's  dealings 
with  men,  not  to  force  conviction  on  them,  but  to  speak  to  them 
according  to  what  He  saw  was  the  state  of  their  hearts.  He 
answered  fools  according  to  their  folly.  (Prov.  xxvi.  5.)  If  He 
had  given  the  Jews  a  more  direct  reply.  He  knew  that  it  would 
have  brought  His  ministry  to  an  abrupt  end,  and  would  have  led 
to  His  being  cut  off  before  the  time. — For  another  thing,  we  must 
remember,  that  however  dark  our  Lord's  saying  seemed  when  it 
was  spoken,  it  did  in  effect  tell  the  Jews  of  the  greatest  and  most 
im'oortant  sign  which  could  be  given  them  as  a  proof  of  His 
Messiahship.  It  told  them  of  His  future  resurrection.  It  was 
equivalent  to  saying,  "You  ask  me  for  a  sign,  and  I  will  give 
yon  one.  I  will  rise  again  from  the  dead  the  third  day  after  my 
crucifixion.  If  I  do  not  so  rise  from  the  dead,  you  need  not 
believe  that  I  am  the  Messiah.  Bat  if  I  do  so  rise,  you  will  be 
without  ex  juse  if  you  do  not  beUeve  on  me."  In  effect  our  Lord 
staked  the  truth  of  His  mission  on  His  resurrection.  He  did 
the  same  when  He  said  that  He  would  give  the  Jewish  nation 
no  sign  but  that  of  the  prophet  Jonas.  (Matt.  xii.  39.)     When 


JOHN,    CHAP.    II.  115 

the  apostles  began  to  preach,  they  continnally  referred  the  Jewa 
to  Christ's  resurrection  as  the  proof  of  His  Messiahship.  And 
why  did  they  do  so?  One  main  reason  was,  because  their  Mas- 
ter had  told  the  Jew?,  the  first  time  He  appeared  in  the  temple, 
that  the  great  sign  they  must  look  to  was  His  own  rising  again 
from  the  dead. 

20. — {Then  said... .Jews,  forty  and  six  years,  Sc]  This  expression 
has  given  rise  to  some  diflference  of  opinion.  The  temple  to 
which  the  Jews  refer,  cannot  of  course  be  the  temple  built  by 
Solomon.  That  temple  was  completely  destroyed  by  Nebuchad- 
nezzar.— Nor  yet  does  it  seem  likely  to  have  been  the  temple 
built  by  Zerubbabel  and  his  companions,  after  the  return  from 
Babylon.  There  is  no  sufficiently  clear  proof  that  this  temple 
was  forty  and  six  years  building. — By  far  the  most  probable 
view  is,  that  the  temple  spoken  of  is  the  one  repaired,  or  rather 
re-built  by  Herod,  and  that  the  forty-six  years  here  mentioned 
mean  the  time  during  which  these  repairs  were  going  on,  and 
that  the  entire  completion  of  them  had  not  been  effected  up  to 
our  Lord's  time.  These  repairs,  according  to  Josephus,  had  been 
going  on  exactly  forty-six  years  when  our  Lord  visited  the  tem- 
ple. They  were  so  extensive  and  costly,  that  eighteen  thousand 
workmen  were  employed  about  them,  and  they  amounted  to  a 
re-building.  Moreover,  the  minds  of  the  Jews  would  probably 
be  full  of  them  at  this  particular  time,  because  they  were  of  re- 
cent date,  if  not  going  on  at  that  very  time.  The  Greek  words 
might  fairly  be  rendered,  "  Forty  and  six  ^  ears  has  this  temple 
been  building." — They  denote  a  time,  as  Whitby  remarks,  not 
perfectly  past. 

If  any  one  desires  to  see  an  instance  of  the  extravagant  lengths 
into  which  a  good  man  may  be  led,  in  following  the  allegorical 
system  of  interpreting  Scripture,  he  will  do  well  to  read  Augus- 
tine's allegorical  explanation  of  the  forty  and  six  years.  It  is  far 
too  absurd  to  be  worth  inserting  here. 

[  Wilt  thou  rear  it  up  in  three  days  f]  This  question  implies 
three  things, — a  sneer,  astonishment,  and  incredulity.  There  is 
probably  an  emphasis  meant  to  be  laid  on  the  word  "  thou." 
Such  an  one  as  thou  1     Wilt  thou  do  it  ? 

That  this  saying  of  our  Lord,  nevertheless,  was  not  thrown 
away  and  forgotten,  but  stuck  in  the  minds  of  the  Jews,  though 
they  did  not  understand  it,  is  strikingly  proved  by  two  facts. — 
One  is,  that  the  false  witnesses  brought  it  forward,  though  in  a 
garbled  form,  when  our  Lord  was  arraigned  before  the  high 
priests. — The?  other  is,  that  the  Jews  taunted  Him  with  it  when 
He  hung  on  the  cross.  (Matt.  xxvi.  61 ;  xxvii.  40.) 

1\, — [But  he  spaJce....temple....hody.]  This  verse  is  an  instance  of 
St.  John's  habit  of  making  explanatory  comments  in  his  Qos- 


116  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

pel  as  he  goes  on,  in  order  to  make  things  clear  to  his  Gontile 
readers. 

Let  it  be  noted,  that  as  our  Lord  calls  His  own  body  a  "tem- 
ple," so  also  the  bodies  of  His  believing  people  are  called  "  the 
temple  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  (1  Cor.  vi.  19.)  If  it  was  wrong 
to  defile  and  profane  the  temple  made  of  stone  and  wood,  how 
much  more  is  it  wrong  to  defile  by  sin  the  temple  of  our  bodies ! 
St.  Paul  and  St.  Peter  both  call  our  bodies  our  "tabernacle." 
(2Cor.  V.  1;  2  Pet.  i.  13.) 

22. — l^When.... risen.... dead....disciples  remembered.']  This  sentence 
is  an  interesting  proof  of  two  things.  For  one  thing,  it  shows 
how  much  hght  was  brought  to  the  minds  of  the  disciples  by 
our  Lord's  resurrection,  and  how  many  hard  sayings  of  His  were 
at  once  unravelled  and  made  plnin. — For  another  thing,  it  shows 
how  long  truth  may  lie  dormant  in  men's  minds  without  being 
understood,  or  doing  them  any  service.  It  is  one  of  the  special 
offices  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  bring  things  to  remembrance.  (John 
xiv.  26.)  We  must  not  suppose  religious  teaching  does  no  good 
because  it  is  not  understood  immediately.  It  may  do  good  long 
after  the  teacher  is  dead. 

[They  believed  the  Scripture.]  What  Scripture  does  this  mean  ? 
It  cannot,  of  course,  be  our  Lord's  saying.  What  our  Lord  said 
is  specially  added,  as  something  beside  the  Scripture,  which  the 
disciples  "  beheved." — Nor  yet  does  it  seem  likely  that  it  means 
anv  particular  text  in  the  Old  Testament  about  the  resurrection. 
I  incline  to  the  opinion,  that  it  means  generally  the  whole  testi- 
mony of  Scripture  to  our  Lord's  claim  to  be  received  as  the 
Messiah.  When  Jesus  rose  from  the  dead,  the  disciples  were 
fully  convinced  that  the  Scripture  about  the  Messiah  was  fulfilled 
in  their  Master. 

The  expression  "believed"  cannot  mean  that  the  disciples 
then  believed  for  the  first  time.  As  in  other  places,  it  signifies 
that  they  believed  fully,  and  without  any  more  doubt  and  hesi- 
tation.    The  same  may  be  said  of  John  xiv.  1. 

23. — [Many  believed.]  These  persons  do  not  appear  to  have  really 
believed  with  the  heart,  but  to  have  been  only  convinced  in  their 
understandings.  The  distinction  between  intellectual  belief  and 
saving  belief,  and  between  one  degree  of  saving  behef  and  ano- 
ther, ought  to  be  carefully  noticed  in  Scripture.  There  is  a  faith 
wtich  devils  have,  and  a  faith  which  is  the  gift  of  God.  The 
persons  mentioned  in  this  verse  had  the  former,  but  not  the 
latter.  So  also  we  are  told  that  Simon  Matifus  "  believed." 
(Acts  viii.  13.)  Again,  there  is  a  real  heart-belief  which  a  man 
may  have  that  admits  of  great  increase.  This  is  the  belief 
spoken  of  in  the  preceding  verse. 


JOHN,    CHAP.    II.  117 

[  When  they  saiu  the  miracles.']  This  expression  shows  us  that 
there  were  many  miracles  worked  by  our  Lord  which  are  no- 
where recorded  in  Scripture.  St.  John  himself  tells  us  so  twice 
over.  (John  xx.  30;  xxi.  25.)  Nicodemus  refers  to  these  miracles 
in  the  beginning-  of  the  following  chapter.  (John  iii,  2.)  If  it 
had  been  good  for  us  to  know  anything  about  these  miracles, 
they  would  no  doubt  have  been  recorded.  But  it  is  well  to  re- 
member that  there  were  such  miracles,  in  order  that  we  may 
rightly  understand  the  unbelief  and  hardness  of  the  Jews  a 
Jerusalem.  The  miracles  whit-h  are  related  as  having  been 
worked  in  or  near  Jerusalem,  we  must  remember,  are  by  no 
means  all  that  our  Lord  worked  there. 

24. — {Did  not  commit  himself.]  The  Greek  word  so  rendered  means 
literally  "  Did  not  trust  himself"  It  is  the  same  verb  that  is 
generally  rendered  "believe." 

[He  knew  all  men.]  This  is  a  direct  assertion  of  our  Lord's 
divine  omniscience.  As  God  He  knew  all  mankind,  and  these 
seeming  believers  among  others.  As  God,  He  knew  that  their 
hearts  were  like  the  stony  ground  in  the  parable,  and  their  faith 
only  temporary. 

Melancthon  makes  some  very  wise  remarks  on  this  verse,  as 
to  the  example  which  our  Lord  sets  us  here  of  caution  in  deal- 
ing with  strangers.  It  is  a  melancholy  fact,  which  the  expe- 
rience of  years  always  confirjns,  that  we  must  not  trust  implicitly 
to  appearances  of  kindness,  or  be  ready  to  open  our  hearts  to 
every  one  as  a  friend,  upon  short  acquaintance.  The  man  who 
does  not  hastily  contract  intimacies,  may  be  thought  cold  and 
distant  by  some ;  but  in  the  long  run  of  life  he  will  escape  many 
sorrows.  It  is  a  wise  saying,  that  a  man  ought  to  be  friendly 
with  all,  but  intimate  with  few. 

25. — [N'eeded  not.. .testify  of  man.]  These  words  mean  that  our 
Lord  had  no  need  of  any  one's  testimony  "about  man."  He 
required  no  information  from  others  about  the  real  character  of 
those  who  professed  faith  in  Him. 

[He  knew  what  was  in  man.]  This  means  that  our  Lord,  as 
God,  possessed  a  perfect  knowledge  of  man's  inner  nature,  and 
was  a  discerner  of  the  thoughts  and  intents  of  the  heart.  We 
should  remember  Solomon's  words  in  his  prayer,  "  Thou  only 
knowest  the  hearts  of  all  the  children  of  men."  (1  Kings  viii.  39.) 

The  immense  difference  between  our  Lord  and  all  ministers 
of  His  Gospel  appears  strikingly  in  this  verse.  Ministers  are 
constantly  deceived  in  their  estimate  of  people.  Christ  never 
was,  and  never  could  be.  When  He  allowed  Judas  Iscariot  to 
be  a  disciple,  He  "was  perfectly  acquainted  with  his  character. 

Wordsworth  observes  that  the  two  last  verses  of  this  chapter 


118 


EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 


"  afford  an  instance  of  the  peculiar  manner  in  whi(3li  the  Holy 
Spirit,  in  St.  John's  Gospel,  pronounces  jud,2:ment  on  things  and 


persons, 
xiii.  11 ; 


Compare  vi. 
xxi.  17." 


64,  71;    vii.  39;   viii.  27;    xii.  33,  37; 


In  leaving  the  whole  passage,  I  cannot  help  remarking  what 
a  faithful  picture  of  human  nature  it  exhibits,  and  how  many  are 
the  ways  in  which  human  corruption  and  infirmity  show  them- 
selves. Within  the  space  of  a  few  verses  we  find  some  openly 
profaning  Grod's  temple  for  the  sake  of  gain, — some  angrily  de- 
manding a  sign  of  Him  who  shows  zeal  for  purity, — some  pro- 
fessing a  false  faith, — and  some  few  only  believing,  but  even 
these  believing  with  a  weak,  unintelligent  faith.  It  is  the  state 
of  things  which  exists  everywhere  and  always. 


JOHN  III.  1—8. 


1  There  was  a  man  of  the  Phari- 
sees, named  Nicodemus,  a  ruler  of 
the  Jews : 

2  The  same  came  to  Jesus  by 
night,  and  said  unto  him.  Rabbi, 
we  know  that  thou  art  a  teacher 
come  from  G-od:  for  no  man  can 
do  these  miracles  that  thou  doest, 
except  Grod  be  with  him. 

3  Jesus  answered  and  said  un- 
to him,  Yerily,  verily,  I  say  unto 
thee,  Except  a  man  be  born  again, 
he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of 
God. 

4  Nicodemus  saith  unto  him. 
How  can  a  man  be  born  when  he 
is  old?    can  he  enter  the  second 


time  into  lis  mother's  womb,  and 
be  born  ? 

5  Jesus  answered,  Yerily,  verily, 
I  say  unto  thee.  Except  a  man  be 
bom  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he 
cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
God. 

6  That  which  is  born  of  the 
flesh  is  flesh;  and  that  which  is 
born  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit. 

7  Marvel  not  that  I  said  unto 
thee.  Ye  must  be  born  again. 

8  The  wind  bloweth  where  it 
listeth,  and  thou  hearest  the  sound 
thereof,  but  canst  not  tell  whence  it 
Cometh,  and  whither  it  goeth :  so  is 
every  one  thai  is  born  of  the  Spirit. 


The  conversation  between  Christ  and  Nicodemus,  which 
begins  with  these  verses,  is  one  of  the  most  important 
passages  in  the  whole  Bible.  Nowhere  else  do  we  find 
stronger  statements  about  those  two  mighty  subjects,  the 
new  birth,  and  salvation  by  faith  in  the  Son  of  God.  Tho 
servant  of  Christ  will  do  well  to  make  himself  thoroughly 
acquainted  with  this  chapter.  A  man  may  be  ignorant  of 
many  things  in  religion,  and  yet  be  saved.     But  to  be 


JOHN,    CHAP.   III.  119 

ignorant  of  the  matters  handled  in  this  chapter,  is  to  be  in 
the  broad  way  which  leadeth  to  destruction. 

We  should  notice,  firstly,  in  these  verses,  what  a  weak 
2nd  feeble  heginning  a  man  may  m,aJce  in  religion^  and  yet 
finally  prove  a  strong  Christian.  We  are  told  of  a  certain 
Pharisee,  named  Nicodemus,  who  feeling  concerned  about 
his  soul,  "  came  to  Jesus  by  night." 

There  can  be  little  doubt  that  Nicodemus  acted  as  he 
did  on  this  occasion  from  the  fear  of  man.  He  was  afraid 
of  what  man  would  think,  or  say,  or  do,  if  his  visit  to  Jesus 
was  known.  He  came  "by  night,"  because  he  had  not 
faith  and  courage  enough  to  come  by  day.  And  yet  there 
was  a  time  afterwards  when  this  very  Nicodemus  took  our 
Lord's  part  in  open  day  in  the  council  of  the  Jews.  "  Doth 
our  law  judge  any  man,"  he  said,  "  before  it  hear  him  and 
know  what  he  doeth."  (John  vii.  51.) — Nor  was  this  all. 
There  came  a  time  when  this  very  Nicodemus  was  one  of 
the  only  two  men  who  did  honour  to  our  Lord's  dead 
body.  He  helped  Joseph  of  Arimathea  to  bury  Jesus, 
when  even  the  apostles  had  forsaken  their  Master  and  fled. 
His  last  things  were  more  than  his  first.  Though  he  began 
ill,  he  ended  well. 

The  history  of  Nicodemus  is  meant  to  teach  us  that  we 
should  never  "  despise  the  day  of  small  things  "  in  religion. 
(Zee.  iv.  10.)  We  must  not  set  down  a  man  as  having  no 
grace,  because  his  first  steps  towards  God  are  timid  and 
wavering,  and  the  first  movements  of  his  soul  are  uncertain, 
hesitating,  and  stamped  with  much  imperfection.  We 
must  remember  our  Lord's  reception  of  Nicodemus.  He 
did  not  "break  the  bruised  reed,  or  quench  the  smoking 
flax,"  which  He  saw  before  Him.  (Matt.  xii.  20.)  Like  Him, 
let  us  take  inquirers  by  the  hand,  and  deal  with  them 
gently  and  lovingly.  In  everything  there  must  be  a  begin- 
ning. It  is  not  those  who  make  the  most  flaming  profes- 
sion of  religion  at  first,  who  endure  the  longest  and  prove 


1.20  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

the  most  steadfast.  Judas  Iscariot  was  an  apostle  when 
Nicodemns  was  just  groping  his  way  slowly  into  full  light, 
Yet  afterwards,  when  Nicodemns  was  boldly  helping  to 
bury  bis  crucified  Saviour,  Judas  Iscariot  had  betrayed 
Him,  and  hanged  himself!  This  is  a  fact  which  ought  not 
to  be  forgotten. 

We  should  notice,  secondly,  in  these  verses,  what  a 
mighty  change  our  Lord  declares  to  he  needful  to  salvation^ 
and  what  a  remarkable  expression  He  uses  in  describing  it. 
He  speaks  of  a  new  birth.  He  says  to  Nicodemus,  "Ex- 
cept a  man  be  born  again,  he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of 
God."  He  announces  the  same  truth  in  other  words,  in 
order  to  make  it  more  plain  to  his  hearer's  mind  :  "  Except 
a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  God."  By  this  expression  He  meant 
Nicodemus  to  understand  that  "  no  one  could  become  His 
disciple,  unless  his  inward  man  was  as  thoroughly  cleansed 
and  renewed  by  the  Spirit,  as  the  outward  man  is  cleansed 
by  water."  To  possess  the  privileges  of  Judaism  a  man 
only  needed  to  be  born  of  the  seed  of  Abraham  after  the 
flesh.  To  possess  the  privileges  of  Christ's  kingdom,  a  man 
must  be  born  again  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

The  change  which  our  Lord  here  declares  needful  to 
salvation  is  evidently  no  slight  or  superficial  one.  It  is 
not  merely  reformation,  or  amendment,  or  moral  change, 
or  outward  altei*ation  of  life.  It  is  a  thorough  change  of 
heart,  will,  and  character.  It  is  a  resurrection.  It  is  a  new 
creation.  It  is  a  passing  from  death  to  life.  It  is  the  im- 
planting in  our  dead  hearts  of  a  new  principle  from  above. 
It  is  the  calling  into  existence  of  a  new  creature,  with  a 
new  nature,  new  habits  of  life,  new  tastes,  new  desires, 
new  appetites,  new  judgments,  new  opinions,  new  hopes, 
and  new  fears.  All  this,  and  nothing  less  than  this  is  im- 
plied, when  our  Lord  declares  that  we  all  need  a  "new 
birth." 


JOHN,    CHAP.   III.  121 

This  change  of  heart  is  rendered  absolutely  necessary  to 
salvation  by  the  corrupt  condition  in  which  we  are  ah, 
without  exception,  born.  "  That  which  is  bom  of  the  flesh 
is  flesh."  Our  nature  is  thoroughly  fallen.  The  carnal 
inind  is  enmity  against  God.  (Rom.  viii.  V.)  We  come 
into  the  world  without  faith,  or  love,  or  fear  toward  God 
We  have  no  natural  inclination  to  serve  Him  or  obey  Him, 
and  no  natural  pleasure  in  doing  His  will.  Left  to  himself, 
no  child  of  Adam  would  ever  turn  to  God.  The  truest 
description  of  the  change  which  we  all  need  in  order  to 
make  us  real  Christians,  is  the  expression,  "new  birth." 

This  mighty  change,  it  must  never  be  forgotten,  we  can- 
not give  to  ourselves.  The  very  name  which  our  Lord 
gives  to  it  is  a  convincing  proof  of  this.  He  calls  it  "  a 
birth."  No  man  is  the  author  of  his  own  existence,  and  no 
man  can  quicken  his  own  soul.  We  might  as  well  expect  a 
dead  man  to  give  himself  life,  as  exj^ect  a  natural  man  to 
make  himself  spiritual.  A  power  from  above  must  be  put 
in  exercise,  even  that  same  power  which  created  the  world. 
(2  Cor.  iv.  6.)  Man  can  do  many  things ;  but  he  cannot 
give  life  either  to  himself  or  to  others.  To  give  life  is  the 
peculiar  prerogative  of  God.  Well  may  our  Lord  declare 
that  we  need  to  be  *'  born  again  I" 

This  mighty  change,  we  must,  above  all,  remember,  is 
a  thing  without  which  we  cannot  go  to  heaven,  and  could 
not  enjoy  heaven  if  we  went  there.  Our  Lord's  words  on 
this  point  are  distinct  and  express.  "  Except  a  man  be 
born  again,  he  can  neither  see  nor  enter  the  kingdom  of 
God."  Heaven  may  be  reached  without  money,  or  rank, 
Of  learning.  But  it  is  clear  as  dayhght,  if  words  have  any 
meaning,  that  nobody  can  enter  heaven  without  a  "new 
birth." 

We  should  notice,  lastly,  in  these  verses,  the  insti*i/ctive 
comparison  which  our  Lord  uses  in  explaining  the  neu  Mrth. 
He  saw  Nicodemus  perplexed  and  astonished  by  the  things 

6 


122  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

lie  had  just  heard.  He  graciously  helped  his  wondering 
mind  by  an  illustration  drawn  from  "the  wind."  A  more 
beautiful  and  fitting  illustration  of  the  work  of  the  Spirit  it 
is  impossible  to  conceive. 

There  is  much  about  the  wind  that  is  mysterious  and 
inexplicable.  "  Thou  canst  not  tell,"  says  our  Lord, 
"  whence  it  cometh  and  whither  it  goeth."  We  cannot 
handle  it  with  our  hands,  or  see  it  with  our  eyes.  When 
the  wind  blows,  we  cannot  point  out  the  exact  spot  where 
its  breath  first  began  to  be  felt,  and  the  exact  distance  to 
which  its  influence  shall  extend.  But  we  do  not  on  that 
account  deny  its  presence. — It  is  just  the  same  with  the 
operations  of  the  Spirit,  in  the  new  birth  of  man.  They 
may  be  mysterious,  sovereign,  and  incomprehensible  to  us 
in  many  ways.  But  it  is  foolish  to  stumble  at  them  because 
there  is  much  about  them  that  we  cannot  explain. 

But  whatever  mystery  there  may  be  about  the  wind,  ita 
presence  may  always  be  known  by  its  sou  ad  and  effects. 
"Thou  hearest  the  sound  thereof,"  says  our  Lord.  When 
our  ears  hear  it  whistling  in  the  windows,  and  our  eyes  see 
the  clouds  driving  before  it,  we  do  not  hesitate  to  say, 
"  There  is  wind." — It  is  just  the  same  with  the  operations 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  new  birth  of  man.  Marvellous 
and  incomprehensible  as  His  work  may  be,  it  is  work  that 
can  always  be  seen  and  known.  The  new  birth  is  a  thing 
that  "  cannot  be  hid."  There  will  always  be  visible  "fruits 
of  the  Spirit"  in  every  one  that  is  born  of  the  Spirit. 

Would  we  know  what  the  marks  of  the  new  birth  are  ? 
—We  shall  find  them  already  written  for  our  learning  in 
the  First  Epistle  of  St.  John.  The  man  born  of  God 
"  believes  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ," — "  doth  not  commit 
sin," — "doeth  righteousness," — "loves  the  brethren," — 
"  overcomes  the  world," — "  keepeth  himself  from  the 
wicked  one." — This  is  the  man  born  of  the  Spirit !  Where 
these  fruits  are  to  be  seen,  there  is  the  new  birth  of  which 


JOHN,   CHAP.   III.  123 

our  Lord  is  speaking.  He  that  lacks  these  marks,  is  yet 
dead  in  trespasses  and  sins.  (John  v.  1 ;  iii.  9 ;  ii.  29 ;  iii. 
14;  V.  4  ;  V.  18.) 

And  noAV  let  us  solemnly  ask  ourselves,  Whether  we 
know  anything  of  the  mighty  change  of  which  we  have 
been  reading?  Have  we  been  born  again?  Can  any 
marks  of  the  new  birth  be  seen  in  us  ?  Can  the  sound  of 
the  Spirit  be  heard  in  our  daily  conversation  ?  Is  the  image 
and  superscription  of  the  Spirit  to  be  discerned  in  our 
lives  ? — Happy  is  the  man  who  can  give  satisfactory 
answers  to  these  questions !  A  day  will  come  when  those 
who  are  not  born  again  will  wish  that  they  had  never  been 
born  at  all. 

Notes.    John  III.  1 — 8. 

1. — [There  ivas  a  man,  <S;c.]  The  close  connection  of  the  conversa- 
tion between  Christ  and  Nicodemus  with  the  end  of  the  preceding 
chapter  ought  to  be  carefully  noted.  In  fact  the  original  Greek 
contains  a  connecting  particle,  which  our  translators  have  omitted 
to  express  in  our  version.  The  chapter  should  begin,  "  And  there 
was  a  man,"  or  "  Now  there  was  a  man." — The  convers^ation  took 
place  when  our  Lord  "  was  in  Jerusalem,"  at  the  time  of  the 
Passover.  Nicodemus  was  one  of  those  who  ''  saw  the  miracles 
which  Jesus  did,"  and  was  so  much  struck  by  what  he  saw,  that 
he  sought  out  our  Lord  in  order  to  converse  with  Him. 

[  Of  the  Pharisees.]  The  striking  variety  of  character  in  those 
who  were  brought  to  believe  on  Christ  while  He  was  on  earth, 
ought  not  to  be  overlooked.  His  disciples  were  not  drawn  exclu- 
sively from  any  one  class.  As  a  general  rule,  none  were  more 
bitterly  opposed  to  Him  and  His  doctrines  than  the  Pharisees. 
Yet  here  we  see  that  nothing  is  impossible  with  grace.  Even  a 
Pharisee  became  an  inquirer,  and  ultimately  a  disciple  !  Nicode- 
mus and  St.  Paul  are  standing  proofs  that  no  heart  is  too  hnrd  to 
be  converted.  The  third  chapter  shows  us  Jesus  teaching  a  proud, 
moral  Pharisee.  The  fourth  will  show  him  teaching  an  ignor  mt, 
immoral  Samaritan  woman.  None  are  too  bad  to  be  taught  by 
Christ. 

[A  ruler  of  the  Jews.]  The  civil  government  of  the  Jews  at 
this  time,  we  must  remember,  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Eornans. 
"When  Nicodemus  is  called  "  a  ruler,"  it  means  that  he  was  a 
chief  person   among  the  Jews,  probably  in  high  ecclesiartical 


124  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

position,  and  certainly  a  famous  religious  teacher.     See  the  IDth 
verse. 

2. — [The  same  came...hy  night]  The  fact  here  recorded  appeals  tc 
me  to  show  that  Nicodemus  was  influenced  by  the  fear  of  man, 
and  was  afraid  or  ashamed  to  visit  Jesus  by  day. — The  view 
maintained  by  some,  that  we  ought  not  to  blame  him  for  coming 
by  night,  because  it  was  the  quietest  time  for  conversation,  and 
the  time  when  an  interview  was  least  liable  to  be  interrupted,  or 
because  tlie  Jewish  teachers  were  in  the  habit  of  receiving  inquir 
ers  by  night,  appears  to  me  undeserving  of  attention.  1  arr 
confirmed  in  this  opmion  by  the  fact,  that  on  the  only  otbei 
occasions  where  Nicodemus  is  mentioned,  he  is  specially  described 
as  the  man  who  "  came  to  Jesus  by  night."  This  repeated 
expression  appears  to  me  to  im.ply  blame.  (John  vii.  50  • 
xix.  39.) 

How  any  one  can  waste  time,  as  some  famous  commentators 
do,  in  speculating  how  the  conversation  between  Christ  and 
Nicodemus  was  reported,  is  to  my  mind  perfectly  astonishing. 
To  hint,  as  one  has  done,  that  Jesus  must  have  told  St.  John 
about  the  conversation  afterwards,  or  that  St.  John  must  have 
been  present,  appears  to  me  to  strike  a  blow  at  the  very  root  of 
inspiration.  Both  here  and  elsewhere,  frequently,  St.  John 
describes  things  which  he  only  knew  by  the  direct  ins[)iration  of 
"  the  Holy  Ghost. 

[Rabbi.]  This  expression  was  a  name  of  dignity  among  the 
Hebrews,  signifying  Doctor  or  Master.  Cruden  says  that  the 
name  came  originally  from  the  Chaldees,  and  that  it  was  not  used 
bef  Te  the  time  of  captivity,  except  in  describing  the  officers  of 
the  kings  of  Assyria  and  Babylon.  Thus  we  find  the  names  of 
Rab-saris  and  Rab-shakeh.  (2  Kings  xviii.  17.)  The  use  of  the 
word  here  by  Nicodemus,  was  intended  to  mark  his  respect  for 
our  Lord. 

[We  know.]  Different  reasons  have  been  assigned  for  Nicode- 
mus' use  of  the  plural  number  in  this  place.  Whom  did  he  mean 
when  he  said  "  we  ?"  Some  say  that  he  meant  himself  and 
many  of  his  brethren  among  the  Pharisees. — Some  say  that  he 
meant  himself  and  the  secret  believers  of  all  classes  mentioned 
at  the  end  of  the  last  chapter. — Some  say,  as  Lightfoot,  that  he 
meant  no  one  in  particular,  but  use  ]  the  plural  lor  the  singular, 
according  to  an  idiom  common  in  all  languages.  '  He  only  meant, 
"It  is  commonly  known." — I  venture  the  suggestion,  that  Nico- 
demus probably  used  the  plural  number  intentionally,  on  account 
of  its  vagueness,  and  avoided  the  singular  number  from  motives 
of  caution,  that  he  might  not  commit  himself  too  much.  Even 
at  the  present  day  people  will  talk  of  "we"  in  religion,  long 
before  they  will  talk  of  "  I." — Weak  faith  strives  to  be  hid  in  a 
crowd. 


JOHN,    CHAP.    III.  125 

[Thou  art  a  teacher  come  from  God.]  This  cautious  sentence 
is  an  instructive  indication  of  the  state  of  Nicodeinus'  mind.  He 
was  naturally  a  timid,  hesitating,  slow-moving  man.  That  Jesus 
was  somebody  remarkable,  he  m- as  convinced  by  His  miracles. 
That  He  might  possibly  be  the  Messiah,  had  probably  crossed  his 
mind,  and  the  more  so  because  he  doubtless  knew  of  the  ministry 
of  John  the  Baptist,  and  had  heard  that  John  spake  of  one 
greater  than  himself  who  was  yet  to  come.  But  until  he  can 
make  out  more  about  Jesus,  by  private  conversation,  he  declines 
to  commit  himself  to  any  stronger  statement  than  that  before  us. 
The  G-reek  words  would  be  more  literally  rendered,  "  From  God 
thou  hast  come  a  teacher." 

Lightfoot  thinks  that  Nicodemus  here  refers  to  the  long  cessa- 
tion of  prophecy,  which  had  now  lasted  for  four  hundred  years. 
During  this  long  period  no  one  had  appeared  from  God  to  teach 
the  once-favouied  Jewish  nation,  as  the  prophets  did  of  old.  But 
now,  he  seems  to  say,  "  Thou  hast  appeared  as  the  prophets  did 
in  former  times,  to  teach  us." 

[No  man  can  do  these  miracles.. ..with  Am.]  This  sentence  has 
been  justly  called  an  illustration  of  one  great  purpose  of  our 
Lord's  miracles.  They  arrested  men's  attention.  They  were 
evidences  of  a  divine  mission.  They  showed  that  He  who 
wrought  them  was  no  ordinary  Person,  and  ought  to  be  lis- 
tened to. 

I  am  aware  that  some  have  thought  that  Nicodemus  attached 
too  much  weight  to  our  Lord's  miracles,  and  have  boldly  asserted 
that  miracles  are  no  necessary  proof  of  a  divine  mission,  seeing 
that  Anti-christ  will  appear  with  signs  and  lying  wonders.  (2 
Thess.  ii.  9;  Rev.  xiii.  14.)  Li  reply  it  might  be  sufficient  to 
remark  that  our  Lord  Himself  declared  that  "  His  works  bore 
witness  that  the  Father  had  sent  Him."  (John  v.  36 ;  x.  25 ;  xv. 
24.)  But  I  also  think  that  sufficient  stress  is  not  laid  on  the 
expression,  "  These  miracles  that  thou  doest."  The  character 
and  quality  of  our  Lord's  miracles  were  such  as  to  prove  His 
divine  commission.  False  teachers  and  .Anti-christs  may  be 
permitted  to  work  some  miracles,  like  the  magicians  who  with- 
stood Moses.  But  there  is  a  point  beyond  which  Anti-christ 
and  his  servants  cannot  go.  Such  miracles  as  our  Lord  worked 
could  only  be  wrought  by  the  finger  of  God.  I  therefore  think 
that  Nicodemus'  argument  was  just  and  correct. — It  is  moreover 
worthy  of  note,  that  the  expression  he  uses  is  precisely  the  same 
as  that  used  by  St.  Peter  when  describing  our  Lord's  ministry 
and  miracles.     He  says,  "  God  was  with  him."  (Acts  x.  38.) 

The  expression,  "  God  being  with  a  man,"  is  a  common 
phrase  in  the  Scriptures,  denoting  the  possession  of  certain  special 


126  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

gifts  or  graces  from  Grod,  beyond  those  ordinnrily  given  to  men, 
Tiius  1  Sam.  xvi  18;  iii.  19;  and  xviii.  12—14. 

3. — [Jesvs  answered.]  Tiie  question  has  often  been  asked,  "To 
what  did  our  Lord  answer?"  No  question  was  put  to  him. 
What  is  the  connecting  hnk  between  the  words  of  Nicodemus, 
and  the  solemn  statement  contained  in  the  first  words  which  our 
Lord  addressed  to  him  ? 

I  believe  the  true  reply  to  these  questions  is,  that  our  Lord,  as 
on  many  other  occasions,  made  answer  according  to  what  He 
saw  going  on  in  Nicodemus'  heart.  He  knew  that  the  inquirer 
before  Him,  hke  all  the  Jews,  was  expecting  the  appearance  of 
Messiah,  and  was  even  suspecting  that  he  had  found  Him.  He 
therefore  begins,  by  telling  him  at  once  what  was  absolutely  need- 
ful if  he  would  belong  to  JMessiah's  kingdom.  It  was  not  a  tem- 
poral kingdom,  as  he  vainly  supposed,  but  a  spiritual  one.  It 
was  not  a  kingdom,  in  which  all  persons  born  of  the  seed  of 
Abraham,  would,  as  a  matter  of  course,  have  a  place  because  of 
their  birth.  It  was  a  kingdom  in  which  grace,  not  blood,  was 
the  indispensable  condition  of  admission.  The  first  thing  need- 
ful in  order  to  belong  to  Messiah's  kingdom,  was  to  be  ''  born 
again."  Men  must  renounce  aU  idea  of  privileges  by  reason  of 
their  natural  birth.  All  men,  whether  Jews  or  Gentiles,  must 
be  born  again,  born  anew,  born  from  above  by  a  spiritual  birth. — 
"Nicodemus,"  our  Lord  seems  to  say,  "if  you  want  to  know 
how  a  man  is  to  become  a  member  of  Messiah's  kingdom,  under- 
stand this  day,  that  the  first  step  is  to  be  born  again.  Think  not 
because  Abraham  is  your  father,  that  Messiah  will  acknowledge 
you  as  one  of  his  subjects.  I  tell  you  at  once,  that  the  first  thing 
you  and  all  other  men  need  is  a  new  birth." 

I  am  quite  aware  that  several  other  explanations  have  been 
given  of  the  link  between  Nicodemus'  remark  and  our  Lord's 
opening  assertion.  I  will  only  say,  that  the  one  I  have  given, 
appears  to  me  by  far  the  simplest  and  most  satisfactory. 

[Verili/^  verily^  I  say  unto  thee.]  This  expression,  which  is 
peculiar  to  St.  John's  Gospel,  has  "been  already  commented  on. 
(John  i.  51.)  BaL  it  is  useful  to  remark,  in  considering  the  verse 
before  ua,  that  the  phrase  is  never  used  except  in  connection 
with  some  statement  oi^  great  importance  and  solemnity. 

[Except  a  man.]  The  Greek  word  which  our  version  has  ren- 
dered "  a  man,"  would  be  more  literally  translated,  "  any  one," 
or  "any  person."  The  change  called  the  "  new  birth,"  our  Lord 
would  have  us  know,  is  of  universal  necessity.  Nobody  can  be 
saved  without  it. 

[Born  again.]  The  Greek  word  here  rendered  "  again,"  might 
be  tiu'islated  with  equal  correctness,  "fi:om  above,"  i.  e.  from 


JOHN,    CHAP.    III.  127 

heaven,  or  from  God.  It  is  so  translated  in  this  cbapfer,  (verse* 
31,)  and  in  four  other  places  in  the  New  Testament.  (John  xix. 
11 ;  James  i.  17;  iii.  15,  17.)  In  one  other  place,  (Galat.  iv.  9,) 
it  is  "  again."  Many  commentators  in  every  age,  as  Origen, 
Cyril,  Theophylact,  Bullinger,  Lightfoot,  Erasmus,  Bengel,  have 
maintained  strongly,  that  "  born  from  above,''  and  not  "  born 
again,"  is  the  true  and  better  translation  of  the  phrase.  Cran 
mer  s  version  renders  it  "  born  from  above,"  and  our  own  trans- 
lators have  allowed  it  in.  a  marginal  reading.  My  own  impres- 
sion agrees  with  that  of  most  commentators,  that  "  born  again  " 
is  the  right  translation. — For  one  thing,  it  seems  most  probable 
that  Nico clemus  understood  our  Lord  to  mean  "  born  again,"  or 
else  he  would  hardly  have  asked  the  question,  "  Can  a  man  enter 
the  second  time  into  his  mother's  womb  and  be  born." — For  ano- 
ther thing,  the  G-reek  words  used  in  four  other  places  where 
regeneration  is  spoken  of  in  the  New  Testament,  admit  of  no 
other  meaning  than  being  "  born  again,"  and  could  not  possibly 
be  rendered  "  born  from  above."  See  1  Pet.  1.  3,  23 ;  Matt.  xix. 
28 ;  Titus  iii.  5. 

The  point  is  happily  not  one  of  importance,  and  men  may 
agree  to  dififer  about  it,  if  they  cannot  convince  one  another. 
Every  true  Christian  is  undoubtedly  "  born  from  above  ''  by  the 
quickening  power  of  God  in  heaven, — as  well  as  "  born  again  "  by 
a  second  spiritual  birth. 

The  meaning  of  our  Lord  when  He  said,  "  except  a  man  be 
born  again,"  is  unhappily  a  subject  on  which  there  is  a  wide 
difference  of  opinion  in  the  Church  of  Christ. — The  expression 
at  any  rate  cannot  be  said  to  stand  alone.  It  is  used  six  times 
in  the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  once  in  the  first  Epistle  of  St.  Peter, 
and  six  times  in  the  first  Epistle  of  St.  John.  (John  i.  13  ;  iii. 
3,  5,  6,  7,  8 ;  1  Peter  i.  23 ;  1  John  ii.  29 ;  iii.  9 ;  iv.  7 ;  v.  1,  4, 
18.)  Common  sense  and  fair  interpretation  of  language,  point 
out  that  "born  again,  born  of  the  Spirit,  and  born  of  God,"  are 
expressions  so  intimately  connected  with  one  another,  that  they 
mean  one  and  the  same  thing.  The  only  question  is,  "  What  do 
they  mean  ?" 

Some  think  that  to  be  '*  born  again,"  means  nothing  more 
than  "  an  outward  reformation,  or  such  outward  conformity  as 
a  proselyte  might  yield  to  a  new  set  of  rules  of  life." — This  is 
an  almost  obsolete  and  utterly  unsatisfactory  interpretation.  It 
makes  our  Lord  tell  Nicodemus  nothing  more  than  he  might 
have  learned  from  heathen  philosophers, — such  as  Socrates,  Plato, 
or  Aristotle  ;  or  than  he  might  have  heard  from  any  Rabbi  about 
the  duties  of  a  proselyte  from  heathenism  to  Judaism. 

Some  think  that  to  be  "born  again,"  means  to  be  admitted 
into  the  Church  of  Christ  by  baptism,  and  to  receive  a  spiritual 


128  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

change  of  heart  inseparably  connected  with  baptism. — This  again 
is  an  unsatisfactory  interpretation.  For  one  tjiing,  it  seems 
improbable,  that  the  first  truth  which  (>ur  Lord  would  propound 
to  an  inquiring  Pharisee,  would  be  the  necessity  of  baptism.  He 
certainly  never  did  so  on  any  other  occasion. — For  another  thing, 
if  our  Lord  only  meant  baptism,  it  is  difficult  to  account  for  the 
astonishment  and  perplexity  which  Nicodemiis  expressed  on 
hearing  our  Lord's  words.  Baptism  was  not  a  thing  with  which 
a  Pharisee  was  unacquainted.  In  the  Jewish  Church  proselytes 
were  baptized. — Last,  but  not  least,  it  is  clear  ft-om  St.  John's 
first  Epistle,  that  to  be  "  born  again,  born  of  the  Spirit,  or  born 
of  God,"  means  something  much  greater  than  baptism.  The 
picture  which  the  apostle  there  gives  of  the  man  who  is  "  born 
of  God,"  could  certainly  not  be  given  of  the  man  who  is 
baptized. 

The  true  view  of  the  expression  I  beheve  to  be  this.  Being 
"  born  again,"  means  that  complete  change  of  heart  and  character 
which  is  produced  in  a  man  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  when  he  repents, 
behoves  on  Christ,  and  becomes  a  true  Christian.  It  is  a  change 
which  is  frequently  spoken  of  in  the  Bible.  In  Ezekiel  it  is 
called  "taking  away  the  stony  heart  and  giving  a  heart  of  flesh," 
— "  giving  a  new  heart,  and  putting  within  a  new  spirit."  (Ezek. 
xi.  19  ;  xxxvi.  26.)  In  Acts  it  is  called  "  repentance  and  conver- 
sion." (Acts  iii.  19.)  In  Romans  it  is  called  "being  ahve 
from  the  dead,"  (Rom,  vi,  13.)  In  Corinthians  it  is  called  "  being 
a  new  creature,"  (2  Cor.  v.  17.)  In  Ephesians  it  is  called 
"  being  quickened,"  (Ephes,  ii.  1,)  In  Colossians  it  is  called 
"  putting  off  the  old  man  and  putting  on  the  new."  (CoIo?b.  iii, 
9.  10.)  In  Titus  it  is  called  the  "washing  of  regenerat.on." 
(Titus  iii,  5.)  In  Peter  it  is  called  "  being  called  out  of  darkness 
into  light,"  and  being  "made  partaker  of  the  divine  natuie," 
(1  Peter  ii.  9;  2  Peter  i.  4.)  In  John  it  is  called  "passing  from 
death  to  life."  (1  John  iii.  14.)  I  believe  that  all  these  e3>.pres- 
sions  come  to  the  same  thing  in  the  end.  They  are  all  the  same 
truth,  only  viewed  from  different  sides.  They  all  mean  that 
mighty  inward  change  of  heart,  which  our  Lord  here  CkUIs  a 
"  new  birth,"  and  which  John  the  Baptist  foretold  would  spe- 
cially characterize  Messiah's  kingdom.  He  was  to  baptize  not 
with  water,  but  with  the  Holy  Ghost.  Our  Lord  begins  Hi? 
address  to  Nicodemus  by  taking  up  His  forerunner's  prediction: 
— He  tells  him  that  he  must  be  "  born  again  "  or  baptized  with 
the  Spirit. — Human  nature  is  so  entirely  corrupt,  diseased,  nnd 
ruined  by  the  fall,  that  all  who  would  be  saved  must  be  born 
again.  No  lesser  change  will  sulhce.  They  need  nothing  less 
than  a  new  birth. 

[He  cannot  see.]  This  expression  has  received  two  interpro- 
tation.i.     Some  think  that  it  means,  "  he  cannot  understand  ot 


JOHN,    CHAP.    III.  129 

comprehend."  Otliers  think  that  it  means,  "he  cannot  enter, 
enjoy,  partake  of^  or  posses'^"  Tlie  last  I  believe  to  be  the  true 
meaning  of  the  expression.  The  first  is  truth,  but  not  the  truth 
of  the  text.  The  second  ib  confirmed  by  the  language  used  in 
the  fifth  verse,  and  is  a  common  form  of  speech  of  which  there 
are  many  instances  in  the  Bible.  Thus  we  find,  to  "  see  hfe,'' 
(John  lii.  36,)— to  "see  corruption,"  (Psalm  xvi.  10,) — to  "see 
death,"  (John  viii.  51,) — to  see  evil,"  (Psalm  xc.  15,) — to  "  see 
sorrow."  (Rev.  xviii.  7.) 

[The  Hngdom  of  Godi]  This  expression  means  that  spiritual 
kingdom  which  Messiah  came  into  the  world  to  set  up,  and  of 
which  all  believers  are  the  subjects, — the  kingdom  which  is  now 
small,  and  weak,  and  despised,  but  which  shall  be  great  and 
glorious  at  the  second  advent.  Our  Lord  declares  that  no  man 
can  belong  to  that  kingdom  and  be  one  of  its  subjects,  without 
a  new  birth.  To  belong  to  the  covenant  of  Israel  with  all  its 
temporal  privileges,  a  man  need  only  be  born  of  Jewish  parents. 
To  belong  to  Messiah's  kingdom,  a  man  must  be  "  born  again  " 
of  the  Spirit,  and  have  a  new  heart. 

Luther's  remark  on  this  verse,  quoted  by  Stier,  is  worth 
reading.  He  supposes  our  Lord  to  say,  "  My  doctrine  is  not  of 
doing,  and  of  leaving  undone,  but  of  being  and  becoming ;  so 
that  it  is  not  a  new  work  to  be  done,  but  the  being  new 
created; — not  the  living  otherwise  but  the  being  new  born." 

The  unvarying  suitableness  of  our  Lord's  t-eaching  to  the  special 
state  of  mind  of  those  whom  He  taught,  deserves  observation. 
To  the  young  ruler  fond  of  his  money,  He  says,  "  Sell  all  and 
give  to  the  poor." — To  the  multitude  craving  food,  He  says, 
"  Labour  not  for  the  meat  that  perisheth." — To  the  Samaritan 
woman  coming  to  draw  water,  He  commends  "  living  water." 
— To  the  Pharisee  proud  of  his  hirth^  as  a  son  of  Abraham,  He 
says,  "  Ye  must  be  born  again."  (Luke  xviii.  22 ;  John  vi.  27 ; 
iv.  10.) 

4. — [Nicodemus  saifh...Jiow.]  The  question  of  Nicodemus  is  pre- 
cisely one  of  those  which  the  natural  ignorance  of  man  in 
spiritual  things  prompts  a  person  to  ask.  Just  as  the  Samaritan 
woman,  in  the  4th  chapter,  put  a  carnal  meaning  on  our  Lord's 
words  about  "  living  water,"  and  the  Jews,  in  the  6th  chapter, 
put  a  carnal  meaning  on  the  "bread  of  God,"  so  Nicodemus 
puts  a  carnal  meaning  on  the  expression  "  born  again." — There 
is  nothing  which  the  heart  of  man  in  every  part  and  every  age 
of  the  world  is  so  slow  to  understand  as  the  work  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  Our  minds  are  so  gross  and  sensuous,  that  we  cannot 
take  in  the  idea  of  an  inward  and  spiritual  operation.  Unless 
we  can  see  things  and  touch  things  in  religion  we  are  slow  to 
believe  them 

6* 


180  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

f  mien  he  is  old.]  This  expression  seems  to  indicate  that 
Nicoderaus  himself  was  an  old  man  when  this  conversation 
took  place.  If  this  be  so,  it  is  only  fair,  in  judging  his  case,  to  make 
some  allowance  for  the  slowness  with  which  old  age  receives  new 
opiniors,  and.  specially  in  the  things  of  religion.  At  the  same 
time  it  supplies  an  encouraging  proof  that  no  man  is  too  old  to  be 
converted.     One  of  our  Lord's  first  converts  was  an  old  manl 

6. — [Boccept....horn  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit]  This  famous  text 
ha^  unhappily  given  rise  to  widely  different  interpretations.  On 
one  thing  only  respecting  it,  nearly  all  commentators  are  agreed 
It  is  the  same  truth  that  is  laid  down  in  the  third  verse,  only 
laid  down  with  greater  fulness  in  compassion  to  Nicodemus' 
weakness  of  understanding.  But  what  does  it  mean  ?  The  ex- 
pression "  born  of  water "  is  pecuhar  to  this  place,  and  occurs 
nowhere  else  in  the  Bible.  It  cannot  be  literally  interpreted. 
No  one  can  be  hterally  "  born  of  water."  What  then  does  the 
phrase  signify  ?  When  can  it  be  said  of  any  one,  that  he  is 
"  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit  ?  " 

The  first  and  commonest  interpretation  is  to  refer  the  text 
entirely  to  baptism,  and  to  draw  from  it  the  inseparable  connec- 
tion of  baptism  and  spiritual  regeneration. — According  to  this 
view  of  the  text,  our  Lord  tells  Nicodemus  that  baptism  is  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  salvation,  and  is  the  appointed  means  of 
giving  new  birth  to  the  heart  of  man.  "  If  you  wish  to  belong 
to  my  kingdom,  you  must  be  born  again,  as  I  have  already 
said ;  and  if  you  wish  to  be  born  again,  the  only  way  to  obtain 
this  mighty  blessing  is  to  be  baptized.  Except  a  man  be  re- 
genei'ated  or  born  again  by  baptism,  he  cannot  enter  my  king- 
dom." This  is  the  view  of  the  text  which  is  maintained  by 
the  fathers,  by  the  Roman  Catholic  writers,  by  the  Lutheran 
commentators,  and  by  many  English  divines  down  to  the  present 
day.  It  is  a  view  which  is  supported  by  much  learning,  and  by 
many  strange  and  far-fetched  arguments,  such  as  Gqu.  i.  2.  It 
is,  however,  a  view  which  to  my  own  mind  is  utterly  unsatis- 
factory. 

The  second,  and  less  common  in«terpretation,  is  to  refer  the 
text  partly  to  baptism  and  partly  to  that  real  regeneration  of 
heart,  which  a  man  may  receive,  like  the  penitent  thief,  without 
having  been  baptized. — According  to  this  view,  our  Lord  tells 
Nicodemus  that  a  new  birth  is  absolutely  necessary  to  salvation, 
and  that  to  be  baptized,  or  "  born  of  water,"  is  one  of  the  appointed 
ways  by  which  regeneration  is  effected.  Those  who  hold  this 
view  deny  as  stoutly  as  any  that  there  is-  any  inseparable  con- 
nection between  baptism  and  regeneration.  They  hold  that  multi- 
tudes are  "  born  of  water  "  who  are  never  born  of  the  Spirit.  But 
they  maintain  that  the  word  "  water  "  must  be  intended  to  point 
us  to  baptism,  and  that  by  the  use  of  the  expression,  "born  of 


JOHN,    CHAP.    III.  131 

water,"  our  Lord  meant  to  defend  both  John's  baptism  and  Hig 
own,  and  to  show  their  value.  This  is  the  view  of  the  text 
which  is  maintained  by  some  few  of  the  best  Roman  Cathohc 
writers,  such  as  Rupertus  and  Ferus, — by  almost  all  the 
English  Reformers,  and  by  many  excellent  commentators  down 
to  the  present  day.  It  is  a  view,  which  to  my  own  mind 
seems  not  much  more  satisfactory  than  the  former  one.  already 
described,  on  account  of  the  strange  consequences  which  it 
involves. 

The  third,  and  much  the  least  common  interpretation,  is  to 
refer  the  text  entirely  to  the  regeneration  of  man's  heart,  and  to 
exclude  baptism  altogether  from  any  place  in  it. — According  to 
this  vie-w,  our  Lord  explains  to  Nicodemus,  by  the  use  of  a  figure, 
what  He  had  meant  when  he  spoke  of  bemg  "  born  again."  He 
would  have  Nicodemus  know  that  a  man  must  have  his  heart  as 
thoroughly  cleansed  and  renewed  by  the  Spirit  as  the  body  is 
cleansed  and  purified  by  water.  He  must  be  born  of  the  Spirit 
working  on  his  inward  nature,  as  water  works  on  the  material 
body.  In  short,  he  must  have  a  "  clean  heart"  created  in  him  if 
he  would  belong  to  Messiah's  kingdom.  Most  of  those  who  take 
this  view,  consider  that  baptism  was  certainly  meant  to  point  to 
the  change  of  heart  described  in  the  text,  but  that  this  text  was 
meant  to  point  out  something  distinct  from  baptism,  and  even 
more  important  than  baptism.  This  is  the  view  which  I  believe 
to  be  the  true  one,  and  to  which  I  unhesitatingly  adhere. 

Those  who  hold  that  baptism  is  not  referred  to  in  this  text,  are 
undoubtedly  a  small  minority  among  theologians,  but  their 
names  are  weighty.  Among  them  will  be  found  Calvin,  Zwingle, 
Bullinger,  Gualter,  Archbishop  Whitgift,  Bishop  Prideaux, 
Whitaker,  Fulke,  Poole,  Hutcheson,  Charnock,  G-ill,  Cartwright, 
Grotius,  Cocceius,  Gomarus,  Piscator,  Rivetus,  Chamier,  Witsius, 
Mastricht,  Turretin,  Lampe,  Barkitt,  A.  Clarke,  and,  according 
to  Lampe,  Wycliffe,  Daille  and  Parous, — I  do  not  assert  this  on 
second-hand  information.  I  have  verified  the  assertion  by  examin- 
ing with  my  own  eyes  the  works  of  all  the  authors  above  named, 
excepting  the  tliree  referred  to  by  Lampe.  On  the  precise  mean- 
ing of  the  word  "  water"  they  are  not  agreed.  But  they  aU  hold 
that  our  Lord  did  not  mean  baptism  when  He  spoke  of  being 
"  born  of  water  and  the  Spirit." — Dean  Alford,  I  observe,  says 
that  the  expression  "  refers  to  the  token,  or  outward  si<in  of 
baptism,  on  any  honest  interpretation."  How  far  it  is  justifiable 
to  use  such  language  about  an  opinion  supportei  by  so  many 
great  names,  I  leave  to  the  reader  to  decide  !  Those  who  wish 
to  see  the  view  of  the  text  which  I  advocate  more  fully  defended, 
will  find  what  they  want  in  Lampe's  Dissertations  and  Chamier'a 
Panstratia, 

In  adhering  to  a  view  of  this  text  which  is  adopted  by  so  few 


132  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

commentators,  I  feel  a  natural  desire  to  give  the  reasons  of  my 
opinion  at  full  length,  and  I  think  that  the  importance  of  the 
subject  in  the  present  day  justifies  me  in  doing  so.  In  giving 
theee  reasons  I  must  decline  entering  into  questions  which  are 
not  directly  before  me.  The  value  of  the  sacrament  of  baptism, 
— the  right  of  infants  to  baptism, — the  true  meaning  of  the  Church 
of  England  Baptismal  Service,  are  matters  which  I  shall  not 
touch.  The  meaning  of  our  Lord's  words,  "  Except  a  man  be 
born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,"  is  the  only  point  to  which  I 
shall  confine  myself  I  believe  that  in  using  thess  words  our 
Lord  did  not  refer  to  baptism,  and  I  think  so  for  the  following 
reasons. 

(a.)  Firstly,  there  is  nothing  in  the  words  of  the  text  which 
necessarily  requires  to  be  referred  to  baptism.  "  Water," — "  wash- 
ing,"— and  "  cleansing"  are  figurative  expressions,  frequently  used 
in  Scripture,  in  order  to  denote  a  spiritual  operation  on  man's  heart. 
(See  Psa,  li.  7-10 ;  Isai.  xliv.  3  ;  Jer.  iv.  14 ;  Ezek.  xxxvi.  25 ; 
John  iv.  10;  vii.  38,  39)  The  expression,  "Born  of  water  and 
of  the  Spirit,"  is  doubtless  very  peculiar.  But  it  is  not  more 
peculiar  than  the  parallel  expression,  "He  shall  baptize  you  with 
the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire."  (Matt.  iii.  10.)  To  explain  this 
last  text  by  the  tongues  of  fire  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  is  an 
utterly  unsatisfactory  interpretation,  and  confines  the  fulfilment 
of  a  mighty  general  promise  to  one  single  act  and  one  single  dny. 
I  believe  that  in  each  case  an  element  is  mentioned  in  connection 
with  the  Spirit,  in  order  to  show  the  nature  of  the  Spirit's  opera- 
tion. Men  must  be  "baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost,"  purifying 
their  hearts  from  corruption,  as  fire  purifies  metal,  and  must  be 
"born  of  the  Spirit,"  cleansing  their  hearts  as  luater  cleanses  the 
body.  The  use  of  fire  and  water  as  the  great  instruments  of 
purification,  was  well  known  to  the  Jews.  See  Num.  xxxi.  23, 
where  both  are  mentioned  together.  Chrysostom  well  remarks 
that  "  Scripture  sometimes  connects  the  grace  of  the  Spirit  with 
fire,  and  sometimes  with  water." 

(h.)  Secondly,  the  assertion  that "  water  "  must  mean  baptism, 
because  baptism  is  the  ordinary  means  of  regeneration,  is  an 
assertion  utterly  destitute  of  Scriptural  proof.  It  is  no  doubt 
written  of  professing  saints  and  believers,  that  "they  have  been 
buried  with  Christ  in  baptism,"  and  that  "  as  many  as  have  been 
baptized  into  Christ  have  put  on  Christ."  (Rom.  vi.  4  ;  Gal.  iii. 
27.)  But  there  is  not  a  single  text  which  declares  that  baptism  i.j 
the  only  way  by  which  people  are  born  again.  On  the  contraiy, 
we  find  two  plain  texts  in  which  regeneration  is  distinctly  a  crib- 
ed,  not  to  baptism,  but  to  the  word,  (1  Pet.  i.  23 ;  James  i.  18.) 
Moreover  the  case  of  Simon  Magus  clear iy  proves,  that  in  apos- 
tolic times  all  persons  did  not  receive  grace  when  they  were 
baptized.     St.  Peter  tells  him  a  very  few  days  after  his  baptism 


JOHN,   CHAP.   III.  138 

"  Thou  art  in  the  gall  of  bitterness  and  the  bond  of  iniquity, — 
thy  heart  'S  not  right  in  the  sight  of  God, — thou  hast  neither 
part  nor  Ijt  in  this  matter."  (Acts  viii.  21 — 23.)  The  assertion, 
therefore,  that  '•'  water  "  must  mean  baptism,  is  a  mere  gratuitous 
assumption,  and  must  fall  to  the  ground. 

(c.)  Thirdly,  if  "  water  "  in  the  text  before  us  means  baptism^ 
it  fallows  as  a  logical  consequence  that  baptism  is  absolutely 
necessary  to  salvation,  and  that  all  who  have  died  unbaptized 
since  these  words  were  spoken,  have  been  lost!  The  penitent 
thief  was  lost  on  this  theory,  for  he  was  never  baptized !  All 
infants  who  have  died  unbaptized  have  been  lost !  The  whole 
body  of  the  Quakers,  who  die  in  their  own  communion,  are  lost! 
There  is  no  evading  this  conclusion,  unless  we  adopt  the  absurd 
and  untenable  hypothesis  that  the  kingdom  of  G-od  in  this  solemn 
passage  means  nothing  more  than  the  visible  church.  Where 
our  Lord,  in  declaring  a  great  general  truth,  makes  no  exceptions, 
we  have  no  right  to  make  them.  If  words  mean  anything,  to 
refer  "  water "  to  baptism  excludes  unbaptized  persons  from 
heaven  !  And  yet  there  is  not  another  instance  in  Scripture  of 
an  outward  ordinance  being  made  absolutely  necessary  to  salva- 
tion, and  specially  an  ordinance  which  a  man  cannot  confer  on 
himself.  A  new,  regenerate  heart  is  undoubtedly  necessary  to  the 
salvation  of  every  one,  without  exception,  and  it  is  of  this  only,  I 
behave,  that  the  text  before  us  speaks. 

(cZ.)  Fourthly,  if  we  accept  the  theory  that  baptism  is  the 
ordinary  means  of  conveying  the  grace  of  regeneration,  that  all 
baptized  persons  are  necessarily  regenerated,  and  that  all  who 
are  "  born  of  water  "  are  at  the  same  time  born  of  the  Spirit,  we 
are  irresistibly  involved  in  the  most  dangerous  and  pernicious 
consequences. — We  pour  contempt  on  the  whole  work  of  the 
Spirit,  and  on  the  blessed  doctrine  of  regeneration.  We  bring 
into  the  Church  a  new  and  unscriptural  kind  of  new  birth,  a  new 
birth  that  cannot  be  seen  by  its  fruits.  We  make  out  that  people 
are  "  born  of  G-od "  when  they  have  not  one  of  the  marks  of 
regeneration  laid  down  by  St.  John. — We  encourage  the  rankest 
antinomianism.  We  lead  people  to  suppose  that  they  have  grace 
in  their  hearts  while  they  are  servants  of  sin,  and  that  they  have 
the  Holy  Spirit  within  them  while  they  are  obeying  the  lusts  of 
the  flesh. — Last,  but  not  least,  we  pour  contempt  on  the  holy 
sacrament  of  baptism.  We  turn  it  into  a  mere  form,  in  which 
faith  and  prayer  have  no  place  at  all.  We  lead  people  to  suppose 
that  it  matters  nothing  in  what  spirit  they  bring  their  children 
to  baptism,  and  that  if  water  is  sprinkled,  and  certain  words  are 
used,  an  infant  is,  as  a  matter  of  course,  born  again.  Worst  of 
all,  we  induce  people  secietly  to  despise  baptism,  because  we 
teach  them  that  it  always  conveys  a  mighty  spiritual  blessing, 
while  t^eir  own  eye?  teU  them,  that,  in  a  multitude  of  cases,  it 


134  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

does  no  good  at  all. — I  see  no  possibility  of  avoiding  tlu'sc  con- 
sequences, however  little  some  pei  sons  who  hold  the  inseparability 
of  baptism  and  regeneration  may  intend  them.  Happily  I  have 
the  comfort  of  thinking  that  there  is  an  utter  want  of  logic  in 
some  hearts  which  have  much  grace. 

(e.)  Fifthly,  if  "  born  of  water  an  d  of  the  Spirit "  was  meant 
to  teach  Nicodemus  that  baptism  is  the  ordinary  means  of  con- 
veying spiritual  regeneration,  it  is  very  difficult  to  understand 
why  our  Lord  rebuked  him  for  not  knowing  it.  "  Knowest  thou 
not  these  tilings?"  How  could  he  know  them?  That  there 
was  such  a  thing  as  baptism,  he  knew  as  a  Pharisee.  But  that 
baptism  was  the  appointed  means  of  conveying  "new  birth,"  he 
could  not  know.  It  was  a  doctrine  nowhere  taught  in  the  Old 
Testament.  It  is  a  doctrine,  on  the  showing  of  its  own  advocates, 
peculiar  to  Chi  istianity.  And  yet  Nicodemus  is  rebuked  for  not 
knowing  it !  To  my  mind  this  is  inexplicable.  The  necessity 
of  a  thorough  change  of  heart,  on  the  contrary,  Nicodemus  might 
have  known  from  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures.  And  it  was  for 
ignorance  of  this,  not  for  ignorance  of  baptismal  regeneration, 
that  he  was  rebuked. 

(/.)  Sixthly  and  lastly,  if  it  be  true  that  "to  be  born  of 
water"  means  baptism,  and  that  baptism  is  the  ordinary  means 
of  conveying  the  grace  of  regeneration,  it  is  most  extraordinary 
that  there  is  so  little  about  baptism  in  the  Epistles  of  the  New 
Testament.  In  Romans  it  is  only  twice  mentioned, — and  in 
1st  Corinthians,  seven  times. — In  Galatians,  Ephesians,  Colos- 
sians,  Hebrews,  and  the  1st  Peter  we  find  it  named  once  in  each 
Epistle.  In  tliirteen  of  the  remaining  Epistles  it  is  neither 
named  nor  referred  to.  In  the  two  Pastoral  Epistles  to  Timothy, 
where  we  might  expect  something  about  baptism,  if  anywhere, 
there  is  not  a  word  about  it !  In  the  Epistle  to  Titus  the  only 
text  that  can  possibly  be  applied  to  baptism  is  by  no  means 
clearly  applicable.  (Titus  iii.  5.)  Nor  is  this  all.  In  the  one 
Epistle  which  mentions  baptism  seven  times,  we  find  the  writer 
saying  that  "  Christ  sent  him  not  to  baptize,  but  to  preach  the 
Gospel,"  and  actually  "  thanking  God,"  that  he  had  "  baptized 
none  of  the  Corinthians,  save  Crispus  and  Gains."  (1  Cor.  i. 
14,  17.)  He  would  surely  never  have  said  this,  if  all  whom  he 
baptized  were  at  once  born  again.  Imagine  St.  Paul  saying, 
''  I  thank  God  I  regenerated  none  of  you !"  Moreover,  it  is  a  star- 
tling fact,  that  this  very  same  Apostle,  in  the  very  same  Epistle, 
says  to  these  same  Corinthians,  "  I  have  begotten  you  through 
the  Gospel."  (1  Cor.  iv.  14.)  My  deliberate!  conviction  is,  that 
St.  Paul  would  never  have  written  these  sentences,  if  he  had 
believed  that  the  only  way  to  be  born  of  the  Spirit  was  to  be 
baptized. 

I  give  these  reasons  with  a  sorrowful  feehng  that  to    many 


JOHX,    CHAP.    III.  135 

they  are  given  in  vain.  But  I  have  felt  it  due  to  iryself,  in 
maintaining  an  opinion  about  a  most  important  text  which 
is  not  commonly  held,  to  state  fully  my  reasons,  and  to  show 
that  my  opinion  is  not  hghtly  maintained. 

Before  leaving  this  subject,  I  think  it  right,  in  self-defence,  to 
say  something  about  the  fact,  that  the  view  I  maintain  is  not 
held  by  the  great  majority  of  commentators.  This  fact  undoubt- 
edly cahs  for  some  explanation. 

With  regard  to  the  Fathers,  no  one  can  read  their  writings 
without  seeing  that  they  were  fallible  men.  On  no  point  doea 
their  weakness  appear  so  strongly,  as  in  their  language  about 
the  sacraments.  The  man  who  intends  to  abide  by  all  the 
opinions  of  the  Fathers  about  the  sacraments,  will  have  to 
swallow  a  great  deal.  After  all,  the  very  earliest  Father,  whose 
commentary  on  St.  John's  Gospel  is  extant,  is  Origen.  who  died 
in  253,  A.D.  The  true  view  of  the  text  before  us,  might  easily 
be  lost  in  the  period  of  at  least  150  years  between  Origen's  day 
and  the  days  of  St.  John.  Tertulhan  incidentally  applies  tho 
text  before  us  to  baptism,  in  one  of  his  writings.  But  even  he 
was  not  born  till  160,  a.d.,  at  least  two  generations  after  St. 
John's  time. 

"With  regard  to  the  Lutheran  writers,  their  avowed  opinions 
upon  the  sacraments  make  their  interpretations  of  the  text  before 
us  of  little  weight.  They  have  a  peculiar  sacramental  theory  to 
maintain  when  they  expound  Scripture,  and  to  that  theory  they 
steadfastly  adhere.  Yet  even  Brentius  on  this  text  confesses,  that 
the  baptism  here  signified  by  "  water,"  means  something  much 
more  than  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  and  includes  the  whole 
doctrine  of  the  Gospel. — The  Roman  Catholic  commentators  are, 
of  course,  even  more  fettered  in  their  views  of  the  sacraments 
than  the  Lutherans,  and  hardly  call  for  any  remark.  Their  con- 
i^nt  endeavour  in  expounding  Scripture,  is  to  maintain  the 
sacramental  system  of  their  own  church,  and  a  text  like  that 
before  us  is  unhesitatingly  applied  to  baptism. 

"With  regard  to  our  own  English  reformers  and  their  immediate 
successors,  their  opinions  about  a  text  like  this  are  perhaps  less 
valuable  than  upon  any  subject.  They  always  display  an  exces- 
sive anxiety  to  agree  with  the  Fathers.  They  were  anxious 
in  every  way  to  conciliate  opponents,  and  to  support  their  own 
Protestantism  by  appeals  to  primitive  antiquity.  When,  there- 
fore, they  saw  that  the  Fathers  refer-ed  the  text  before  us  to 
baptism,  and  that  at  best  the  point  was  doubtful,  we  cannot 
wonder  that  they  held,  that  to  be  "born  of  water"  was  to  be 
baptized.  Yet  even  they  seem  not  unanimous  on  the  point ;  and 
Latimer's  well-known  assertion,  that  "to  be  christened  with 
water  is  not  regeneration,"  must  not  be  forgotten. — The  famous 


136  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

remarks  of  Hooker,  which  are  so  frequently  thrown  in  the  teeth 
of  those  who  take  the  view  of  "water  and  the  Spirit,"  which  I 
do,  are  a  curious  instance  of  the  coolness  witli  which  a  great  man 
can  soihetimes  draw  an  illogical  conclusion  in  his  own  favour, 
from  some  bioad  general  premise.  He  lays  down  the  general 
principle  ''  that  when  a  literal  construction  of  a  text  will  stand, 
that  furthest  from  the  letter  is  commonly  the  worst."  He  then 
proceeds  to  take  it  for  granted,  that  to  interpret  "  born  of  water  " 
of  baptism,  is  the  literal  constiuction  of  the  text  now  before  us. 
Unfortunately  this  is  precisely  the  point  that  I  for  one  do  not 
concede ;  and  his  conclusion  is  consequently,  to  my  mind,  worth- 
less. Moreover  when  we  talk  of  a  "literal"  sense,  there  must 
evidently  be  so^ne  limit  to  it.  If  not,  we  cannot  answer  the 
Eoman  Catholic,  when  he  proves  transubstantiation  from  the 
words,  "  this  is  my  body." 

I  beheve  that  for  a  true  and  sound  exposition  of  the  text  before 
us,  we  must  look  to  the  Puritans  and  Dutch  divines  of  the  seven- 
teenth century.  It  was  necessary  for  men  to  be  a  generation 
further  off  from  Romanism,  before  they  were  able  to  give  a 
dispassionate  opinion  about  such  a  text  as  this.  The  early 
Protestants  did  not  see  the  consequences  of  the  language  they 
sometimes  used  about  baptism  with  sufficient  clearness.  Other- 
wise, I  beheve  they  Avould  not  have  written  about  it  as  they 
did.  To. any  one  who  asks  for  a  specimen  of  the  17th  century 
divinity,  I  would  say,  that  one  of  the  simplest  and  best  state- 
ments of  the  true  meaning  of  the  text  before  us,  will  be  found  in 
Poole's  Annotations. 

In  leaving  the  whole  subject,  there  is  one  fact  which  I  think 
deserves  very  serious  consideration.  Those  Churches  of  Chris- 
tendom at  the  present  day,  which  distinctly  maintain  that  all 
baptized  persons  are  born  of  the  Spirit,  are  as  a  general  rule,  the 
most  corrupt  churches  in  the  world.  Those  bodies  of  Christians 
on  the  other  hand,  which  deny  the  inseparable  connection  of 
bapti-m  and  the  new  birth,  are  precisely  those  bodies  which 
are  most  pure  in  faith  and  practice,  and  do  most  for  the 
extension  of  the  Gospel  in  the  world.  This  is  a  great  fact  which 
ought  not  to  be  forgotten. 

6. — {^That  which  is  born.. .flesh.. .spirit]  In  this  verse,  our  Lord 
gives  Nicodemus  the  reason  why  the  change  of  heart  called 
"new  birth,"  is  a  thing  of  such  absolute  necessity,  and  why 
no  slight  moral  change  will  suffice.  Nicodemus  had  spoken  of 
"  entering  a  second  time  into  his  mother's  womb."  Our  Lord 
tells  him,  that  even  if  such  a  thing  was  possible,  it  would  not 
make  him  fit  for  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  child  of  human 
parents  would  always  be  like  the  purents  from  which  it  sprung, 
if  it  was  born  a  hundred  times  over.  "  That  which  is  born  ot 
the  fleah  is  flesh."     All  men  and  women  are  by  nature  corrupt. 


137 

sinful,  -fleshly,  and  alienated  from  God.  "  They  that  are  in  the 
flesh  cannot  please  God."  (Rom.  viii.  8.)  Their  children  will 
always  be  born  with  a  nature  like  that  of  their  parents.  To 
bring  a  clean  thing  out  of  an  unclean,  is  proverbially  impossible 
A  bramble  will  never  bear  grapes,  however  much  it  may  be 
L'ultivated,  and  a  natural  man  will  never  be  a  godly  man  without 
the  Spirit.  In  order  to  be  really  spiritual  and  fit  for  the  kiDg- 
dom  of  God,  a  new  power  from  without  must  enter  into  a  man's 
nature.     "  That  which  is  born  of  the  spirit  is  spirit." 

The  sentence  is  undoubtedly  very  elliptical,  and  expressed  in 
abstract  terms.  It  is  like  St.  Paul's  words,  "  The  carnal  mind 
is  enmity  against  God."  (Rom.  viii.  7.)  But  the  general  mean- 
ing is  unmistakeable.  Human  nature  is  so  utterly  fallen, 
corrupt,  and  carnal,  that  nothing  can  come  from  it  by  natural 
generation,  but  a  fallen,  corrupt,  and  carnal  offspring.  There 
is  no  seh-curative  power  in  man.  He  will  always  go  on  repro- 
ducing himself  To  become  spiritual  and  fit  for  communion 
with  God,  nothing  less  is  required  than  the  entrance  of  the 
Spirit  of  God  into  our  hearts.  In  one  word,  we  must  have  that 
new  birth  of  the  Spirit  which  our  Lord  twice  described  to 
Nicodemus. 

The  word  ''  flesh,"  I  am  inclined  to  think,  with  Poole  and 
Dyke,  is  taken  in  two  senses  in  this  verse.  In  the  first  case,  it 
means  the  natural  body  of  man,  as  in  John  i.  14.  In  the  second 
case,  it  means  the  corrupt  carnal  nature  of  man,  as  in  Gal.  v. 
17. — The  same  remark  applies  to  the  word  Spirit.  In  the  first 
instance,  it  means  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  in  the  second,  the  spiritual 
nature  which  the  Spirit  produces.  The  offspring  of  all  children 
of  Adam  is  fleshly.  The  ofifspring  of  the  Spirit  is  spiritual.  Nei- 
ther the  grace,  nor  rank,  nor  money,  nor  learning  of  parents  will 
prevent  a  chil»J  having  a  corrupt  heart,  if  it  is  naturally  born  of 
the  flesh.  Nothing  will  make  any  one  spiritual  but  being  born 
again  of  the  spirit. 

It  must  be  carefully  remembered,  in  considering  this  verse, 
that  it  cannot  be  applied  to  the  human  nature  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  Though  He  had  a  true  body  like  our  own,  He  was  not 
*'  born  of  the  flesh"  as  we  are.  by  natural  generation,  but  con- 
ceived by  the  miraculous  operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

7. — [Marvel  not. .must  he  horn  again.]  In  reading  this  verse,  the 
stress  ought  to  be  laid  on  the  two  last  words,  "  born  again."  It 
is  evident  that  the  thing  which  stumbled  Nicodemus  was  the 
idea  of  any  "  new  birth"  at  all  being  necessary.  He  felt  unable 
to  understand  what  this  "new  birth"  was.  Our  Lord  forbids 
him  to  marvel,  and  proceeds  to  explain  the  new  birth  by  a 
familiar  illustration. 

It  is  a  noteworthy  and  striking  fact,  that  no  doctrine  has  ex- 


l38  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

cited  *ucli  surprise  in  every  age  of  the  Church,  and  has  called 
forth  s )  much  opposition  from  the  great  and  learned,  as  this  very 
doctrine  of  the  new  birth.  The  men  of  the  present  day  who 
sneer  at  conversions  and  revivals,  as  fanaticism  and  enthusiasm, 
are  nowise  better  than  Nicodemus.  Like  him,  they  expose  their 
own  ignorance  of  the  work  of  the  Holy  Grhost. 

8. — [The  wind  hloweth,  c&c]  The  object  of  this  verse  appears  to  be 
to  explain  the  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  regeneration  of 
man,  by  a  familiar  illustration  drawn  from  the  wind.  Mysterious 
as  the  Spirit's  work  was,  Nicodemus  must  allow  that  there  was 
much  of  mystery  about  the  wind.  "  The  wind  bloweth  where  it 
listeth."  We  cannot  account  for  the  direction  in  which  it  blows, 
or  for  the  beginning  or  extent  of  its  influence.  But  when  we 
hear  the  sound  of  the  wind,  we  do  not  for  a  moment  question 
that  it  is  blowing.  Our  Lord  tells  Nicodemus  that  it  is  just  the 
same  with  the  operations  of  the  Spirit.  There  is  doubtless  much 
about  them  that  is  mysterious  and  incomprehensible.  But  when 
we  see  fruit  brought  forth,  in  a  manifest  change  of  heart  and 
life,  we  have  no  right  to  question  the  reaUty  of  the  Spirit's 
operations. 

The  last  clause  of  the  verse  is  undeniably  somewhat  diflBcult, 
— "  So  is  every  one  that  is  born  of  the  Spirit."  We  should  rather 
have  expected,  "  So  does  the  Spirit  operate  on  every  one  that  is 
born  again."  And  this  wa=;,  no  doubt,  our  Lord's  meaning.  Yet 
the  form  of  speech  which  our  Lord  uses  is  not  altogether  without 
parallel  in  the  New  Testament.  For  instance,  we  read,  "  The 
kingdom  of  heaven  is  likened  unto  a  man  which  sowed  good 
seed."  (Matt.  xiii.  24.)  The  likeness  in  this  case  is  clearly  not 
between  the  man  and  the  kingdom.  The  meaning  is  that  the 
whole  story  is  an  illustration  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  So  also 
we  read  that  ''  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  hke  unto  a  merchant- 
man seeking  goodly  pearls,"  and  might  make  a  similar  remark. 
(Matt.  xiii.  45.) 

The  G-reek  word  translated  "  wind,"  at  the  beginning  of  this 
verse,  might  be  rendered  with  equal  correctness,  "  the  Spirit." 
Many  think,  as  Origen,  Augustine,  Rupertus,  Bengel,  Schottgen, 
Ambrose,  Jansenius,  Wyclifife's  Version,  Bucer,  and  Bede,  that 
it  ought  to  be  so  rendered.  They  deny  that  our  Lord  brought 
in  the  idea  of  "  the  wind"  at  all.  They  object  to  it  being  said  of 
the  wind  that  "  it  listeth,"  and  tay  that  the  expression  cannot  be 
applied  to  any  but  a  person. 

This  notion  seems  to  me,  as  it  does  :o  the  great  majority  of 
commentators,  entirely  untenable.  For  one  thing,  it  creates 
great  awkwardness  to  make  a  comparison  between  tlie  Spirit  and 
the  work  of  the  Spirit,  which  we  must  do  if  this  theory  is 
correct.     "The  Spirit  bloweth, — and  so  is  every  one  born  of  the 


JOHN,    CHAP.    III. 


139 


Spirit!" — For  another  thing,  it  seems  to  me  very  strange  to 
speak  of  the  Holy  Ghost  as  *'  blowing,"  and  to  speak  of  the 
"sound"  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  or  of  that  "sound"  being  heard  by 
Nicodemus. 

I  can  see  no  difficulty  whatever  in  the  expression,  "  The  wind 
bloweth  where  it  listeth."  It  is  common  in  the  Bible  to  personify 
unintelHgent  things,  and  to  speak  of  them  as  having  mind  and 
will.  Thus  our  Lord  speaks  of  the  "  stones  crying  out."  (Luke 
xix.  40.)  And  the  Psalmist  says,  "  The  sun  knoweth  his  going 
down."  (Psalm  civ.  19.)  See  also  Job  xxxvii.  8,  35. — In  addition 
to  this,  I  see  a  peculiar  beauty  in  the  selection  of  the  wind  as  an 
illustration  of  the  work  of  the  Spirit.  Not  only  is  the  illustration 
most  apt  and  striking,  but  it  is  one  which  is  used  in  other  places 
in  Scripture.  See  for  instance,  in  the  vision  of  the  dry  bones, 
how  Ezekiel  cries  to  the  "  wind"  to  breathe  on  the  slain,  (Ezek. 
xxxvii.  9.)  See  also  Cant.  iv.  16,  and  Acts  ii.  2. — Last,  but  not 
least,  it  seems  to  me,  that  Nicodemus'  state  of  perplexity  makes 
it  highly  probable  that  our  Lord  would  graciously  help  his  igno- 
rance by  the  use  of  a  famihar  illustration,  like  that  of  the  wind. 
If  no  illustration  at  all  was  used  in  this  verse,  it  is  not  quite  easy 
to  see  how  its  language  would  help  Nicodemus  to  understand  the 
doctrine  of  the  new  birth. — But  if  the  verse  contains  a  famihar 
illustration,  the  whole  purpose  of  our  Lord  in  saying  what  He 
did  becomes  clear  and  plain. 


JOHN  m.  9—21. 


9  Nicodemus  answered  and  said 
unto  him,  How  can  these  things  be  ? 

10  Jesus  answered  and  said  un- 
to him,  Art  thou  a  master  of  Israel, 
and  knowest  not  these  things  ? 

1 1  V"erily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee. 
We  speak  that  we  do  know,  and 
testify  that  we  have  seen ;  and  ye 
receive  not  our  witness. 

12  If  I  have  told  you  earthly 
things,  and  ye  beUeve  not,  how 
BhaU  ye  believe,  if  I  teU  you  of 
heavenly  Ihings  ? 

13  And  no  man  hath  ascended 
up  to  heaven,  but  he  that  came 
down  from  heaven,  "vtn  the  Son  of 
man  which  is  in  heaven. 

14  And  as  Moses  lifted  up  the 


serpent  in  the  wilderness,  even  so 
must  the  Son  of  man  be  lifted  up : 

15  That  whosoever  belie veth  in 
him  should  not  perish,  but  have 
eternal  hfe. 

16  For  God  so  loved  the  world, 
that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son, 
that  whosoever  believeth  in  him 
should  not  perish,  but  have  ever- 
lasting life. 

V\  For  God  sent  not  his  Son  in- 
to the  world  to  condemn  the  world ; 
but  that  the  world  through  him 
miglit  be  saved. 

18  He  that  beUeveth  on  him  is 
not  condemned:  but  he  that  be- 
lieveth not  is  condemned  already, 
because  he  hath  not  believed  in  the 


140 


EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 


hateth  the  light,  neither  cometh  to 
the  light,  lest  his  deeds  should  be 
reproved. 

21  But  he  that  doeth  truth 
cometh  to  the  Ught,  that  his  deeds 
may  be  made  manifest,  that  they 
are  wrought  in  God. 


name  of  the  only  begotten  Son  of 
God. 

19  And  this  is  the  condemnation, 
that  light  is  come  into  the  world, 
and  men  loved  darkness  rather 
than  light,  because  their  deeds 
were  evil. 

20  For  every  one  that  doeth  evil 

We  have  in  these  verses  the  second  part  of  the  conversa- 
tion between  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  Nicodemus.  A 
lesson  about  regeneration  is  closely  followed  by  a  lesson 
about  justification  !  The  whole  passage  ought  always  to 
be  read  with  afiectionate  reverence.  It  contains  words 
which  have  brought  eternal  life  to  myriads  of  souls. 

These  verses  show  us,  firstly,  what  gross  spiritual  igno- 
rance there  may  he  in  the  mind  of  a  great  and  learned  man. 
We  see  a  "master  of  Israel"  unacquainted  with  the  first 
elements  of  saving  religion.  Nicodemus  is  told  about  the 
new  birth,  and  at  once  exclaims,  "  How  can  these  things 
be  ?"  When  such  was  the  darkness  of  a  Jewish  teacher, 
what  must  have  been  the  state  of  the  Jewish  people  ?  It 
was  indeed  due  time  for  Christ  to  appear !  The  pastors 
of  Israel  had  ceased  to  feed  the  people  with  knowledge. 
The  blind  were  leading  the  blind,  and  both  were  falling 
into  the  ditch.  (Matt.  xv.  14.) 

Ignorance  like  that  of  Nicodemus  is  unhappily  far  too 
common  in  the  Church  of  Christ.  We  must  never  be 
surprised  if  we  find  it  in  quarters  where  we  might  reason- 
ably expect  knowledge.  Learning,  and  rank,  and  high 
ecclesiastical  ofiice  are  no  j^roof  that  a  minister  is  taught 
by  the  Spirit.  The  successors  of  Nicodemus,  in  every  age, 
arft  far  more  numerous  than  the  successors  of  St.  Peter. 
On  no  point  is  religious  ignorance  so  common  as  on  the 
work  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  That  old  stumbling-block,  at 
which  Nicodemus  stumbled,  is  as  much  an  ofience  to 
thousands  in  the  present  day  as  it  was  in  the  days  of 
Christ.      'The  natural  man  receiveth   not  the  things  of 


JOHN,    CHAP.    III.  141 

the  Spirit  of  God."  (1  Cor.  ii.  14.)  Happy  is  he  who  haa 
been  taught  to  prove  all  things  by  Scripture,  and  to  call  no 
man  master  upon  earth.  (1  Thess.  v.  21 ;  Matt,  xxiii.  9.) 

These  verses  show  us,  secondly,  the  original  source  froin 
which  man's  salvation  springs.  That  source  is  the  love  of 
God  the  Father.  Our  Lord  says  to  Nicodemus,  "  God  so 
loved  the  world  that  He  gave  His  only  begotten  Son,  that 
whosoever  believeth  in  Him  should  not  perish,  but  have 
everlasting  life." 

This  wonderful  verse  has  been  justly  called  by  Luther, 
"The  Bible  in  miniature."  No  part  of  it,  perhaps, 
is  so  deeply  important  as  the  first  five  words,  "  God  so 
loved  the  world."  The  love  here  spoken  of  is  not  that 
special  love  with  which  the  Father  regards  His  own 
elect,  but  that  mighty  pity  and  compassion  with  which 
He  regards  the  whole  race  of  mankind.  Its  object  is  not 
merely  the  little  flock  which  He  has  given  to  Christ  froti 
all  eternity,  but  the  whole  "  world "  of  sinners,  withou? 
any  exception.  There  is  a  deep  sense  in  which  God  loves 
that  world.  All  whom  He  has  created  He  regards  with 
pity  and  compassion.  Their  sins  He  cannot  love ; — but 
He  loves  their  souls.  "  His  tender  mercies  are  over  all 
His  works."  (Psal.  cxlv.  9.)  Christ  is  God's  gracious 
gift  to  the  whole  world. 

Let  us  take  heed  that  our  views  of  the  love  of  God  are 
Scriptural  and  well-defined.  The  subject  is  one  on  which 
error  abounds  on  either  side. — On  the  one  hand  we  must 
beware  of  vague  and  exaggerated  opinions.  We  must 
maintain  firmly  that  God  hates  wickedness,  and  that  the 
end  of  all  who  persist  in  wickedness  will  be  destruction. 
It  is  not  true  that  God's  love  is  "lower  than  hell."  It  is 
not  true  that  God  so  loved  the  world  that  all  mankind  will 
be  finally  sa"ved,  but  that  He  so  loved  the  world  that  He 
gave  His  Son  to  be  the  Saviour  of  all  who  believe.  His 
love  is  offered  to  all  men  freely,  fully,  honestly,  and  unre- 


142  EXPOSITOKY  THOUGHTS. 

servedly,  but  it  is  only  through  the  one  channel  cf  Christ's 
redemption.  He  that  rejects  Christ  cuts  himself  off  from 
God's  love,  and  will  perish  evedastingly. — On  the  other 
hand,  we  must  beware  of  narrow  and  contracted  opinions. 
We  must  not  hesitate  to  tel]  any  sinner  that  God  loves  him. 
It  is  not  true  that  God  cares  for  none  but  His  own  elect,  or 
that  Christ  is  not  offered  to  any  but  those  who  are  ordained 
to  eternal  life.  There  is  a  "  kindness  and  love"  in  God 
towards  all  mankind.  It  was  in  consequence  of  that  love 
that  Christ  came  into  the  world,  and  died  upon  the  cross. 
Let  us  not  be  wise  above  that  which  is  written,  or  more 
systematic  in  our  statements  than  Scripture  itself.  God 
has  no  pleasure  in  the  death  of  the  wicked.  God  is  not 
willing  that  any  should  perish.  God  would  have  all  men 
to  be  saved.  God  loves  the  world.  (John  vi.  32 ;  Titus 
iii.  4  ;  1  John  iv.  10 ;  2  Pet.  iii.  9  ;  1  Tim.  ii.  4  ;  Ezek.  xxxiii. 

11.) 

These  verses  show  us,  thirdly,  the  peculiar  plan  by 
which  the  love  of  God  has  provided  salvation  for  sinners. 
That  plan  is  the  atoning  death  of  Christ  on  the  cross.  Our 
Lord  says  to  Nicodemus,  "As  Moses  lifted  up  the  serpent 
in  the  wilderness,  even  so  must  the  Son  of  man  be  lifted 
I  up,  that  Avhosoever  believeth  in  Him  should  not  perish, 
I  but  have  eternal  life." 

By  being  "  lifted  up,"  our  Lord  meant  nothing  less  than 
His  own  death  upon  the  cross.  That  death.  He  would 
have  us  know,  was  appointed  by  God  to  be  "the  life 
of  the  w^orld."  (John  vi.  51.)  It  was  ordained  from  all 
eternity  to  be  the  great  propitiation  and  satisfaction  for 
man's  sin.  It  was  the  payment,  by  an  Almighty  Substitute 
and  Representative,  of  man's  enormous  debt  to  God. 
When  Christ  died  upon  the  cross,  our  many  sins  were  laid 
upon  Him.  He  was  made  "  sin"  for  us.  He  was  made  "  a 
curse"  for  us.  (2  Cor.  v.  21  ;  Gal.  iii.  13.)  By  His  death 
He  purchased  pardon  and  complete  redemption  for  sinners. 


JOHN,    CHAP.    III.  143 

The  brazen  serpent,  lifted  up  in  the  camp  of  Isrj^el,  brought 
health  and  cure  within  the  reach  of  all  who  were  bitten  by 
serpents.  Christ  crucified,  in  like  manner,  brought  eternal 
life  within  reach  of  lost  mankind.  Chiist  has  been  lifted 
up  on  the  cross,  and  man  looking  to  Him  by  faith  may  be 
sayed. 

The  truth  before  us  is  the  very  foundation-stone  of  the 
Christian  religion.  Christ's  death  is  the  Christian's  life. 
Christ's  cross  is  the  Christian's  title  to  heaven.  Christ 
"  lifted  up"  and  put  to  shame  on  Calvary  is  the  ladder  by 
which  Christians  "enter  into  the  holiest,"  and  are  at 
length  landed  in  glory.  It  is  true  that  we  are  sinners ; — 
but  Christ  has  suffered  for  us.  It  is  true  that  we  deserve 
death  ; — but  Christ  has  died  for  us.  It  is  true  that  we  are 
guilty  debtors ; — but  Christ  has  paid  our  debts  with  His 
own  blood.  This  is  the  real  Gospel !  This  is  the  good 
news !  On  this  let  us  lean  while  we  live.  To  this  let  us 
cling  Avh en  we  die.  Christ  has  been  "lifted  up"  on  the 
cross,  and  has  thrown  open  the  gates  of  heaven  to  all 
believers. 

These  verses  show  us,  fourthly,  the  way  in  which  the 
benefits  of  Chrisfs  death  are  made  our  ow7i.  That  way 
is  simply  to  put  faith  and  trust  in  Christ.  Faith  is  the 
same  thing  as  believing.  Three  times  our  Lord  repeats 
this  glorious  truth  to  Nicodemus.  Twice  He  proclaims 
that  "whosoever  believeth  shall  not  perish."  Once  He 
says,  "  He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  of  God  is  not  con- 
demned." 

Faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  is  the  very  key  of  salvation.  He 
that  has  it  has  life,  and  he  that  has  it  not  has  not  life. 
Nothing  whatever  beside  this  faith  is  necessary  to  our 
complete  justification ;  but  nothing  whatever,  except  this 
faith,  will  give  us  an  interest  in  Christ.  We  may  fast  and 
mourn  for  sin,  and  do  many  things  that  are  right,  and  ise 
religions  ordinances,  and  give  all  our  goods  to  feed  the 


144  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

poor,  and  yet  remain  unpardoned,  and  lose  our  souls. — But 
if  we  will  only  come  to  Christ  as  guilty  sinners,  and  believe 
on  Him,  our  sins  shall  at  once  be  forgiven,  and  our  iniqui- 
ties shall  be  entirely  put  away.  Without  faith  there  is  no 
salvation ;  but  through  faith  in  Jesus,  the  vilest  sinner  may 
be  saved. 

If  we  would  have  a  peaceful  conscience  in  our  religion, 
let  us  see  that  our  views  of  saving  faith  are  distinct  and 
clear.  Let  us  beware  of  supposing  that  justifying  faith  is 
any  thing  more  than  a  sinner's  simple  trust  in  a  Saviour, 
the  grasp  of  a  drowning  man  on  the  hand  held  out  for  his 
relief. — Let  us  beware  of  mingling  anything  else  w^ith  faith 
in  the  matter  of  justification.  Here  we  must  always 
remember  faith  stands  entirely  alone.  A  justified  man,  no 
doubt,  will  always  be  a  holy  man.  True  believing  will 
always  be  accompanied  by  godly  living.  But  that  which 
gives  a  man  an  interest  in  Christ,  is  not  his  living.,  but  his 
faith.  If  we  w  ould  know  whether  our  faith  is  genuine,  we 
do  well  to  ask  ourselves  how  we  are  living.  But  if  we 
would  know  whether  we  are  justified  by  Christ,  there  is 
but  one  question  to  be  asked.  That  question  is,  "  Do  we 
believe  ?" 

These  verses  show  us,  lastly,  the  true  cause  of  the  loss  of 
man^s  soul.  Our  Lord  says  to  Nicodemus,  "  This  is  the 
condemnation,  that  light  is  come  into  the  world,  and  men 
loved  darkness  rather  than  light,  because  their  deeds  were 
evil." 

The  words  before  us  form  a  suitable  conclusion  to  the 
glorious  tidings  which  we  have  just  been  considering.  They 
completely  clear  God  of  injustice  in  the  condemnation  of 
einners.  They  show  in  simple  and  unmistakeable  terms, 
that  although  man's  salvation  is  entirely  of  God,  his  ruin, 
if  he  is  lost,  will  be  entirely  from  himself.  He  will  reap 
the  fruit  of  his  own  sowing. 

The  doctrine  here  laid  down  ought  to  be  carefully  re- 


145 

membered.  It  supplies  an  answer  to  a  common  cavil  of 
the  enemies  of  God's  truth.  There  is  no  decreed  reproba- 
tion, excluding  any  one  from  heaven.  "  God  sent  not  His 
Son  into  the  world  to  condemn  the  world,  but  that  the 
world  through  Him  might  be  saved."  There  is  no  unwill- 
ingness on  God's  part  to  receive  any  sinner,  however  great 
his  eins.  God  has  sent  "  light "  into  the  world,  and  if  man 
will  not  come  to  the  light,  the  fault  is  entirely  on  man's 
side.  His  blood  will  be  on  his  own  head,  if  he  makes  ship- 
wreck of  his  soul.  The  blame  will  be  at  his  own  door,  if 
he  misses  heaven.  His  eternal  misery  will  be  the  result  of 
his  own  choice.  His  destruction  will  be  the  work  of  his 
ow^n  hand.  God  loved  him,  and  was  willing  to  save  him  ; 
but  he  "  loved  darkness,"  and  therefore  darkness  must  be 
his  everlasting  portion.  He  would  not  come  to  Christ,  and 
therefore  he  could  not  have  life.  (John  v.  40.) 

The  truths  we  have  been  considering  are  peculiarly 
weighty  and  solemn.  Do  we  live  as  if  we  believed,  them  ? 
— Salvation  by  Christ's  death  is  close  to  us  to-day.  Have 
we  embraced  it  by  faith,  and  made  it  our  own  ? — Let  us 
never  rest  till  we  know  Christ  as  our  own  Saviour.  Let  us 
look  to  Him  without  delay  for  pardon  and  peace,  if  we 
have  never  looked  before.  Let  us  go  on  believing  on  Him, 
if  we  have  already  believed.  "  Whosoever,"  is  His  own 
gracious  word, — '''-whosoever  believeth  on  Him,  shall  not 
perish,  but  have  eternal  life." 

Notes.    John  HI.  9—21. 

9. — [Nicodemus  answered. ..Tiow... these  things  be?]  This  is  the  third 
and  last  time  that  Nicodemus  speaks  during  his  visit  to  Christ, 
BO  far  as  it  is  reported  to  us.  His  question  here  is  a  striking  and 
instructive  in>tance  of  the  deep  spiritual  ignorance  which  may 
be  found  in  the  mind  of  a  learned  man.  In  four  different  ways 
our  Lord  had  brought  before  him  one  and  the  same  lesson.  First, 
He  had  laid  down  the  great  principle  that  every  man  must  be 
"born  again." — Secondly,  He  had  repeated  the  same  thing  in 
fuller  words,  and  brought  in  the  idea*  of  "  water/'  to  .illuatrate 


146  EXPOSITORY    THOUGHTS. 

the  work  of  the  Spirit. — Thirdly,  he  had  shown  tlie  necessity 
of  the  new  birth,  from  the  natural  corruption  of  man. — Fourthly, 
He  had  illustratea  the  work  of  the  Spirit  a  second  time  by  tho 
instance  of  the  "  wind."  And  yet  now,  after  all  that  our  Lord 
has  said,  this  learned  Pharisee  seems  utterly  in  the  dark,  and 
asks  the  pitiable  question,  " How  can  these  things  be?"  We 
have  no  right  to  be  surprised  at  the  vast  ignorance  of  saving 
religion  which  we  see  on  all  sides,  when  we  consider  the  history 
of  Nicodemus.  We  should  make  up  our  minds  to  expect  to  find 
spiritual  darkness  the  rule,  and  spiritual  light  the  exception. 
Few  things  in  the  long  run  give  so  much  trouble  to  ministers, 
missionaries,  teachers,  and  district-visitors,  as  beginning  work 
with  extravagant  and  unscriptural  expectations. 

10. — [Jesus  answered  and  said.]  It  will  be  observed,  that  our 
Lord  does  not  answer  the  question  of  Nicodemus  directly,  but 
rebukes  him  sharply  for  his  ignorance.  Yet  it  ought  to  be  care- 
fully noted,  as  Melancthon  remarks,  that  before  He  conchides 
what  He  now  begins  to  say,  He  supplies  a  complete  answer  to 
His  inquirer.  He  shows  him  the  true  root  and  spring  of  regene- 
ration, namely,  faith  in  Himself.  He  answers  his  groping  in- 
quiry, "  How  can  these  things  be  ?  "  by  showing  him  the  first 
step  in  saving  religion,  viz.,  to  believe  in  the  Son  of  God.  Ijet 
Nicodemus  begin  like  a  little  child,  by  simply  believing  on  Him 
who  was  to  be  lifted  up  on  the  cross,  and  he  would  soon  under- 
stand "  hoiv  "  a  man  could  be  born  again,  even  in  his  old  age. 

[Art  thou  a  master  of  Israel]  The  English  version  of  this 
question  hardly  gives  the  full  force  of  the  original.  It  should 
be  hterally  rendered,  "  Art  thou  the  master  of  Israel?  "  i.  e.,  "  Art 
thou  the  famous  teacher  and  instructor  of  the  Jews?"  ''Dost 
thou  profess  to  be  a  light  of  them  that  sit  in  darkness,  and  an 
instructor  of  others?" — The  expression  certainly  seems  to  indi- 
cate that  Nicodemus  was  a  man  of  established  reputation  as  a 
•  teacher  among  the  Pharisees.  When  the  teachers  were  so- 
ignorant,  what  must  have  been  the  state  of  the  taught  ? 

[Knowest  not  these  things.]  These  words  unquestionably  imply 
rebuke.  The  things  which  our  Lord  had  just  mentioned,  Nico- 
demus ought  to  have  known  and  understood.  He  professed  to 
be  a  religious  teacher.  He  professed  to  know  the  Old  Testament 
Scriptures.  The  doctrine,  therefore,  of  the  necessity  of  a  new 
birth  ought  not  to  have  appeared  strange  to  him.  "  A  clean 
heart, — circumci'^ion  of  the  heart, — a  new  heart, — a  heart  of 
stone  instead  of  a  heart  of  flesh,"  were  expressions  and  ideas 
which  he  must  have  read  in  the  prophets,  and  which  all  pointed 
towards  the  new  birth.  (Psalm  li.  10  ;  Jer.  iv.  4  ;  Ezek.  xviii.  31 : 
xxxvi.  26.)  His  ignorance  conBequently  was  deserving  ol 
blam^. 


147 

The  verse  before  us  appears  to  me  to  supply  a  strong  argument 
against  the  idea  that  the  expression,  "born  of  water  and  the 
Spirit"  means  baptism.  I  do  not  see  how  Nicodemus  could 
possibly  have  known  this  doctrine,  as  it  is  nowhere  revealed  in 
the  Old  Testament,  and  even  its  own  advocates  confine  it  to  New 
Testament  times.  To  blame  a  man  for  not  knowing  "  things  " 
which  he  could  not  possibly  know,  would  be  obviously  most 
unjust,  and  entirely  at  variance  with  the  general  tenor  of  our 
Lord's  dealings. 

11.. — [We  speak  that  we  do  know,  <frc.]  Whom  does  our  Lord  mean 
here  when  He  says  "we?"  The  answers  to  this  question  are 
various. 

(a.)  Some  think,  as  Lutntn^,  Brentius,  Bucer,  G-ualter,  Aretius, 
Hutcheson,  Musculus,  Gomarus,  Piscator,  and  Cartwright,  that 
"  we"  means,  "  I  and  John  the  Baptist." 

(&.)  Some  think,  as  Calvin,  Beza,  and  Scott,  that  it  means,  "  I 
and  the  Old  Testament  prophets." 

(c.)  Some  think,  as  Alcuin,  (according  to  Maldonatus,)  and 
Wesley,  that  it  means,  "I  and  all  who  are  born  of  the  Spirit." 

(d.)  Some  think,  as  Chrysostom,  Cyril,  Rupertus,  Calovius, 
Glassius,  Chemnitius,  Lampe,  Leigh,  Nifanius,  Cornelius  a  Lapide, 
Cocceius,  Stier  and  Bengel,  that  it  means  either,  "  I  and  the 
Father,"— or  "I  and  the  Holy  Ghost, "—or  "I  and  both  the 
Father  and  the  Spirit." 

(e.)  Some  think,  as  Theophylact,  Zvvingle,  Poole,  and  Dod- 
dridge, that  our  Lord  only  means  Himself  wnen  He  says  "  we," 
and  that  He  uses  the  plural  number  in  order  to  give  weight  and 
dignity  to  what  He  says,  as  kings  do.  So  also  He  says,  "  Where- 
unto  shall  we, liken  the  kingdom  of  God?  or  with  what  compari- 
son shall  we  compare  it  ?  "  (Mark  iv.  30.)  "  We,"  in  that  text, 
evidently  stands  for  "  I." — In  St.  John's  First  Epistle,  the  first 
person  plural  is  used  instead  of  the  singular  repeatedly  in  the 
first  five  verses  of  the  first  chapter. 

The  last  of  these  five  opinions  appears  to  me  by  far  the  most 
probable  and  satisfactory. — The  three  first  seem  to  me  to  be  en- 
tirely overthrown  by  John  the  Baptist's  words  in  this  chapter, 
(v.  32,)  where  he  mentions  it  as  a  peculiar  mark  of  our  Lord's 
superiority  to  all  other  teachers,  that  "  He  testifi;;'th  what  He 
hath  seen  and  heard." — The  fourth  opinion  appears  to  me  unten- 
able. The  fear  of  Socinianism  must  not  make  us  wrest  texts 
in  order  to  apply  them  to  the  Trinity.  There  is  a  fitness  in  our 
Lord's  saying,  during  His  earthly  mmistry,  after  His  incarnation, 
"I  speak  and  testily  what  1  have  known  and  seen  from  all 
eternity  with  my  Father."     But  there  is  no  apparent  fitness  in 


14:8  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

saying  that  He  and  the  two  other  Persons  in  the  Trinity 
"  speak  what  they  have  seen." 

The  meaning  of  the  sentence  appears  to  be  this,  *'  I  declare 
with  authority,  and  bear  witness  to  truths,  which  from  all 
eternity  I  have  known  and  seen,  as  God  in  union  with  the 
Father  and  the  Holy  Ghost.  I  do  not  speak  (as  all  merely 
human  ministers  must)  what  I  have  been  taugb.t  by  others.  I 
do  not  testify  things  whiai  I  have  received  as  God's  servant,,  as 
ordinary  prophets  have,  and  which  I  should  not  have  known 
wi^^hout  God's  inspiration,  I  testify  what  I  have  seen  with  my 
Father,  and  knew  before  the  world  began."  It  is  like  the  ex- 
pression, "I  speak  that  which  I  have  seen  with  my  Father." 
(John  viii.  38.) 

Melancthon  thinks  that  our  Lord,  in  this  verse,  contrasts  the 
uncertain  traditions  and  human  inventions  which  the  Pharisees 
taught,  with  the  sure,  certain,  and  irrefragable  truths  of  God, 
which  he  came  to  preach. 

Bacer  remarks  that  the  verse  contains  a  practical  lesson  for  all 
religious  teachers.  No  man  has  a  right  to  teach,  unless  he  is 
thoroughly  persuaded  of  the  truth  of  what  he  teaches. 

[Ye  receive  not  our  witness.]  This  sentence  corresponds  so 
exactly  with  John  the  Baptist's  words,  at  verse  32,  that  it  con- 
firms me  in  the  opinion  that  our  Lord,  in  this  verse,  only  speaks 
of  Himself.  The  words  before  us,  as  well  as  those  of  John  the 
Baptist,  must  be  taken  with  some  qualification :  "The  greater 
part  of  you  receive  not  our  testimony." — The  object  of  the  verse 
is  to  rebuke  the  unbelief  of  Nicodemus  and  all  who  were  like- 
minded  with  him  among  the  Jews.  The  use  of  the  plural  num- 
ber "  ye,"  makes  it  probable  that  our  Lord  in  this  verse  refers 
not  merely  to  what  He  had  just  been  saying  to  Nicodemus,  but 
to  all  His  pubUc  teaching  at  Jerusalem,  from  the  time  of  His 
casting  out  the  buyers  and  sellers  in  the  temple.  If  we  do  not 
adopt  this  theory,  we  must  suppose  Him  to  mean,  '•  What  I 
have  spoken  and  testified  to  you  about  regeneration,  is  what  I 
continually  say  to  all  who  come,  like  you,  to  inquire  of  me;  and 
yet  neither  you  nor  they  believe  what  I  say.  You  all  alike 
stumble  at  this  stumbling-stone,  the  new  birth." 

Calvin  remarks  on  this  expression,  that  we  ought  never  to  be 
ourprised  at  unbehef.  If  men  would  not  receive  Christ's  testi- 
mony, it  is  no  wonder  if  they  will  not  receive  ours. 

[2. [If  I  have  told... earthly.,  heavenly  things?]    To  see  the  full  force 

of  this  verse,  we  should  paraphrase  it  thus.  "  If  ye  do  not  be- 
lieve what  I  say  when  I  tell  you,  as  I  have  done,  things  that  are 
earthly,  how  will  you  beheve  if  I  go  on,  as  I  shall  do,  to  tell 
you  of  things  that  are  heavenly?     If  you  will  not  believe  when 


JOHN,    CHAP.   lU.  149 

ye  hear  my  first  lesson,  what  will  ye  do  when  ye  hear  my 
second?  If  ye  are  stumbled  at  the  very  alphabet  of  my  Q-ospel, 
what  will  ye  do  when  I  proceed  to  show  you  higher  and  deeper 
truths?" 

The  difi&culty  of  the  verse  lies  in  the  two  expressions,  •'  earth- 
ly things  "  and  "  heavenly  things."  Our  Lord  does  not  explain 
them,  and  we  are  therefore  left  to  conjecture  their  true  meaning, 
— I  offer  the  following  explanation  with  some  diffidence,  as  the 
most  satisfactory  one. 

By  "  t  artlily  things  "  I  believe  our  Lord  means  the  doctrine  of 
the  "new  birth,"  which  He  had  just  been  expounding  to  Nico- 
demus.  By  "  heavenly  things  "  I  believe  He  means  the  great 
and  solemn  truths  which  he  was  about  immediately  to  declare, 
and  which  he  does  declare  in  rapid  succession  from  this  verse 
down  to  the  end  of  the  conversation. — These  truths  were  His 
own  divinity, — the  plan  of  redemption  by  His  own  death  on  the 
cross, — the  love  of  God  to  the  whole  world,  and  His  consequent 
provision  of  salvation,  —faith  in  the  Son  of  God  as  the  only  way 
to  escape  hell, — and  man's  wilful  rejection  of  light,  the  only 
cause  of  man's  condemnation. 

But  why  does  our  Lord  call  the  new  birth  an  "  earthly  thing  ?" 
I  reply  that  He  does  so,  because  it  is  an  "  earthly  "  thing  com- 
pared with  His  own  divinity  and  atonement.  Regeneration  is  a 
thing  that  takes  place  in  man,  here  upon  earth.  The  atonement 
is  a  transaction  that  was  done  for  man,  and  of  which  the  special 
effect  is  on  man's  position  before  God  in  heaven.  In  regenera- 
tion God  comes  down  to  man,  and  dwells  in  him  upon  earth. 
In  the  atonement  Christ  takes  up  man's  nature  as  man's  repre- 
sentative, and  as  man's  forerunner  goes  up  into  heaven. — Re- 
generation is  a  change  of  which  even  the  men  of  this  world 
have  pome  faint  inkling,  and  which  can  be  illustrated  by  such 
earthly  figures  as  water  and  wind.  Almost  every  one  allows, 
as  Bucer  remarks,  that  he  is  not  so  good  as  he  should  be,  and 
that  he  heeds  some  change  to  fit  him  for  heaven.  Christ's  di- 
vinity, and  the  incarnation,,  and  the  atonement,  and  justification 
by  faith,  are  such  high  and  heavenly  things  that  man  has  no 
natural  conception  of  them. — Regeneration  is  so  far  an  "  earth- 
ly "  idea  that  even  irreligious  men  borrow  the  word,  and  talk  of 
regenerating  nations,  and  society.  Salvation  by  faith  in  Christ's 
blood  is  so  entir^-ly  a  "  heavenly  thing,"  that  it  is  constantly  mis- 
understood, hated,  and  sneered  at  by  unconverted  men. — When 
therefore  our  Lord  calls  the  new  birth  an  '■  earthly  thing,"  we 
must  understand  that  he  does  so  comparatively.  In  itself  the 
new  bu-th  is  a  high,  holy,  and  "  heavenly  thing."  But  compared 
with  the  doctrine  of  the  incarnation  and  the  atonement,  it  is  m 
"  earthly  thing." 


150  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

13. — [And  no  man  hath  ascended,  (£c.]  This  verse,  according  to  my 
view,  contains  the  first  "  heavenly  thing  "  which  our  Lord  dis- 
plays to  Nicodemus.  But  the  sentence  is  undeniably  a  difficult 
one,  and  commentators  differ  widely  as  to  its  meaning. 

Some  think,  as  Calvin.  Masculus,  Bullinger,  Hutcheson,  Poole, 
Quesnel,  Schottgen,  Dyke,  Lightfoot,  Leigh,  Doddridge.  A. 
Clarke,  and  Stier,  that  our  Lord  here  shows  to  Nicodemus,  ir 
highly  figurative  language,  the  necessity  of  divine  teaching,  in 
order  to  understand  spiritual  truth. — "  No  child  of  Adam  has 
ever  reached  the  lofty  mysteries  of  heaven,  and  made  himself 
acquainted  with  its  high  and  holy  truths,  by  his  own  natural 
understanding.  Such  knowledge  is  only  possessed  by  the  in- 
carnate Saviour,  the  Son  of  man,  who  has  come  down  from 
heaven.  If  you  would  know  spiritual  truth,  you  must  sit  at  His 
feet,  ami  learn  of  Him."  This  view  of  the  text  is  supported  by 
Prov.  XXX.  34.  According  to  this  view,  the  verse  must  be  taken 
in  close  connection  with  the  preceding  one,  where  the  ignorance 
of  Nicodemus  is  exposed. 

Some  think,  as  Zwingle,  Melancthon,  Brentius,  Aretius,  Fla- 
cius,  and  Ft-rus,  that  our  Lord  here  shows  to  Nicodemus,  (and 
again  in  highly  figurative  language,)  the  impossibility  of  human 
merit,  and  the  utter  inabihty  of  man  justifying  himself,  and  ob- 
taining an  entrance  into  heaven  by  his  own  righteousness. — 
"  No  one  can  possibly  ascend  into  Grod's  presence  in  heaven,  and 
stand  perfect  and  complete  before  Him,  except  the  incarnate  Sa- 
viour, who  has  come  down  from  heaven  to  fultil  .all  righteous- 
ness. I  am  the  way  to  heaven.  If  you  would  enter  heaven, 
you  must  believe  on  the  Son  of  man,  and  become  a  member  of 
His  body  by  faith." — This  view  of  the  text  appeals  for  support 
to  Rom.  X.  6 — 9.  According  to  this  view,  the  verse  must  be 
taken  in  close  connection  with  the  following  verse^  in  which  the 
way  of  justification  is  explained. 

The  true  view  of  the  text,  I  venture  to  think,  is  as  follows. 
The  words  of  the  text  are  to  be  taken  literally.  Our  Lord  be- 
gins His  list  of  "heavenly  things"  by  declaring  to  Nicodemus 
His  own  divine  nature  and  dignity.  He  reminds  him  that  no 
one  has  ever  ascended  literally  into  that  heaven  where  God 
dwells.  Enoch,  and  Elijah,  and  David,  for  iristance,  were  doubt- 
less in  a  place  of  bliss,  when  they  left  this  world,  but  they  had 
not  "  ascended  into  heaven."  (Acts  ii.  34.)  But  that  which  no 
man,  not  even  the  hoUest  saint,  had  attained,  was  the  right  and 
pierogative  of  Him  in  whose  company  Nicodemus  was.  The 
Son  of  man  had  dwelt  from  all  eternity  in  heaven,  had  come 
down  from  lieaven,  would  one  day  ascend  again  into  heaven, 
and  in  His  <livine  nature  was  actually  in  heaven,  one  with  God 
the  Father,  at  that  very  moment. — "  Know  who  it  is  to  whom 


.     JOHN,    CHAP.    HI.  Vj\ 

you  are  speaking.  I  am  not  merely  a  teacher  come  from  God, 
as  you  say.  I  am  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  man,  foretold  b^ 
Daniel.  I  have  come  down  from  heaven,  according  to  prom  so, 
to  save  sinners.  I  shall  one  day  ascend  again  mto  heaven,  as 
the  victorious  forerunner  of  a  saved  people.  Above  all,  I  am  as 
God  in  heaven  at  this  moment.  I  am  He  who  fills  heaven  and 
earth," — I  prefer  this  view  of  the  verse  to  any  other,  for  two 
reasons.  For  one  thing,  it  gives  a  literal  meaning  to  every  word 
in  the  text.  For  another,  it  seems  a  fitting  answer  to  the  first 
idea  which  Nicodemus  had  put  forward  in  the  conversation,  viz., 
that  our  Lord  was  only  "  a  teacher  come  from  God."  It  is  the 
view  Tvhich  is  in  the  main  held  by  Rollock,  Calovius,  and  Goma- 
rus,  and  expounded  by  them  with  much  ability. 

The  Greek  word  which  we  render  "  but,"  I  am  inclined  to 
think,  ought  to  be  taken  in  an  adversative  rather  than  in  an  ex- 
ceptive sense.  Instances  of  this  usage  will  be  found  in  Matt.  xii. 
4 ;  Mark  xiii.  32 ;  Luke  iv.  26,  27 ;  John  xvii.  12 ;  Rev.  ix.  4 ; 
xxi.  27.  The  thought  appears  to  be,  "  Man  has  not,  and  cannot 
ascend  into  heaven.  But  that  which  man  cannot  do,  I  the  Son 
of  man  can  do." 

"  Heaven,"  throughout  this  verse,  must  be  taken  in  jae  sense 
of  that  immediate  and  pecuhar  presence  of  God,  which  we  can 
conceive  of  and  express  in  no  other  form  than  by  the  word 
"  heaven." 

The  expression  "which  is  in  heaven,"  deserves  particular 
notice.  It  is  one  of  those  many  expressions  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment which  can  be  explained  in  no  other  way  tiian  by  the  doc- 
trine of  Christ's  divinity.  It  would  be  utterly  absurd  and  un- 
true to  say  of  any  mere  man,  that  at  the  very  time  he  was 
speaking  to  another  on  earth  he  was  in  heaven !  But  it  can  be 
said  of  Christ  with  perfect  truth  and  propriety.  He  never  ceased 
to  be  very  God,  when  He  became  incarnate.  He  was  ^''  with 
God  and  was  God."  As  God  He  was  in  heaven  while  He  was 
speaking  lo  Nicodemus. 

The  expression  is  one  which  no  Socinian  can  explain  away. 
If  Christ  was  only  a  very  holy  man  and  nothing  more,  He  could 
not  have  used  the^a  words.  The  Socinian  explanation  of  the  for- 
mer part  of  the  verse,  viz.,  that  Christ  was  caught  up  into  heaven 
after  His  baptism,  and  there  instructed  about  the  Gospel  He  was 
to  teach,  would  be  of  itself  utterly  absurd,  and  a  mere  theory 
invented  to  get  over  a  difficulty.  But  the  conclusion  of  the 
verse  is  a  blow  at  the  very  root  of  the  Socinian  system.  It  is 
written  not  only  that  Christ  "  came  down  from  heaven,"  but. 
that  "  he  is  in  heaven." 

It  admits  of  a  question  whether  the  Greek  words  which  we 


152  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

translate  "  wliicli  is,"  do  not,  both  here  and  in  chap.  i.  18,  poini 
to  that  peculiar  name  of  Jehovah,  which  was  doubtless  familiar 
to  jSTicodemus,  "  The  ever  existing  One  ;  the  Uving  One  "  It  is 
the  same  phrase  which  forms  part  of  Christ's  name  in  Revela- 
tion, 'Him  which  is."  (Rev.  i.  4.) 

Much  cf  the  difficulty  of  the  verse  is  removed  by  remember- 
ing that  the  past  tense,  "hath  ascended,"  admits  of  being  ren- 
dered with  equal  grammatical  correctness,  "  does  ascend,  can 
ascend,  or  will  ascend."  Pearce  takes  this  view,  and  quotes  in 
support  of  it  John  i.  26 ;  iii.  18 ;  v.  24 ;  vi.  69  ;  xi.  27  ;  xx.  29. 

Whitby  thinks  that  throughout  this  verse  our  Lord  has  in 
view  a  Rabbinical  tradition,  that  Moses  had  been  into  heaven 
to  receive  the  law, — and  that  He  declares  the  falsehood  of  this 
tradition  by  saying,  "no  man,  not  even  Moses,  has  ascended 
into  heaven." 

J  4. — [As  Moses  lifted.. .serpent. .so  must,  &c.,  c&c]  In  this  verse  our 
Lord  proceeds  to  show  Nicodemus  another  "  heavenly  thing," 
viz.,  the  necessity  of  His  own  crucifixion.  Nicodemus  probably 
thought,  like  most  Jews,  that  when  Messiah  appeared.  He  would 
come  with  power  and  glory,  to  be  exalted  and  honoured  by  men. 
Jesus  tells  him  that  so  far  from  this  being  the  case,  Messiah 
must  be  "  cut  off"  at  His  first  advent,  and  put  to  an  open  shame 
by  being  hanged  on  a  tree.  He  illustrates  this  by  a  well-known 
event  in  the  history  of  Israel's  wanderings,  the  story  of  the 
brazen  serpent.  (Numb.  xxi.  9.)  "Are  you  expecting  me  to  take 
to  myself  power  and  to  restore  the  kingdom  of  Israel  ?  Cast 
away  such  a  vain  expectation.  I  have  come  to  do  very  different 
work.  I  have  come  to  suffer,  and  to  offer  up  myself  as  a  sacri- 
fice for  sin." 

The  mention  of  Moses,  of  whom  the  Pharisees  thought  so 
much,  was  eminently  Ci.lculated  to  arrest  the  attention  of  Nico- 
demus.  "  Even  Moses,  in  whom  ye  trust,  has  supplied  a  most 
vivid  type  of  my  great  work  on  earth — the  crucifixion." 

[The  Son  of  Man  must  he  lifledup.]  The  expression  "  Son  of 
Man  "  was  doubtless  intended  to  remind  Nicodemus  of  Daniel's 
prophecy  of  the  Me  siah. — The  Greek  word  rendered  "  must," 
signifies  "it  behoveth  that,"  "it  is  necessary  that."  It  is  neces- 
sary in  order  that  God's  promises  of  a  Redeemer  may  be  ful- 
filled,— the  types  of  the  Old  Testament  sacrifices  be  accomplish- 
ed,— the  law  of  God  be  satisfied, — and  a  way  for  God's  mo-cy 
be  provided.  In  order  to  all  this  Messiah  must  suffer  in  our 
st'iad.  The  phrase  "  lifted  up,"  appears  to  me  most  decidedly  to 
mean  "  lilted  up  on  the  cross."  For  one  thing  we  find  it  so  ex- 
plained in  this  Gospel.  (John  xii.  32,  33.)  Por  another  the  il- 
lus/ration  of  the  brazen  serpent  makes  it  absolutely  necessary 


153 

to  explain  it  so.  To  apply  the  phrase,  as  Calvin  and  others  do, 
to  the  "  necessity  of  lifting  up  and  exalting  Christ's  atonement 
in  Christian  teaching,"  seems  to  me  a  mistake.  It  is  needlessly 
dragging  in  an  idea  which  the  words  were  not  intended  to  co!i- 
vey.  It  is  truth  no  doubt,  and  truth  abundantly  taught  in  Scrip- 
tare,  but  not  the  truth  of  this  text. 

The  main  points  of  resemblance  in  the  comparison, — ''  Aa 
Moses  lifted  up  the  serpent  in  the  wilderness," — form  a  subject 
which  requires  careful  handling.  The  lifting  up  of  the  serpent 
of  brass  for  the  relief  of  Israel  when  bitten  by  serpents,  is  evi- 
dently selected  by  our  Lord  as  an  apt  illustration  of  His  own 
crucifixion  for  sinners.  But  how  far  may  we  press  th's  illus- 
tration ?  Where  are  we  to  stop  ?  What  are  the  exact  points  at 
which  the  type  and  antitype  meet  ?  These  questions  require 
consideration. 

Some  see  a  meaning  in  the  "  brass"  of  which  the  serpent  was 
made,  as  a  shining  metal,  a  strong  metal,  &c.,  &c.  I  cannot  see 
it.     Our  Lord  does  not  even  mention  the  brass. 

Some  see  in  the  "  serpent"  hanging  on  the  pole,  a  type  of  the 
devil,  the  old  serpent,  bruised  by  Christ's  death  on  the  cross,  and 
openly  triumphed  over  on  it.  (Coloss.  ii.  15.)  I  cannot  see  tliis 
at  all.  It  appears  to  me  to  confound  and  mingle  up  two  Scrip- 
tural truths,  which  ought  to  be  kept  distinct.  Moreover,  there 
is  something  revolting  in  the  idea,  that  in  order  to  be  healed, 
the  Israehte  had  to  look  at  a  figure  of  the  devil. 

Some  see  in  *'  Moses"  lifting  up  the  serpent,  a  type  of  the  law 
of  God  requiring  payment  of  its  demands,  and  becoming  the 
cause  of  Christ  dying  on  the  cross.  On  this  I  will  content  myself 
with  saying  that  I  am  not  satisfied  that  this  idea  was  in  Christ's 
mind. 

The  points  of  resemblance  appear  to  me  to  be  these. — 

(a.)  As  the  Israelites  were  in  sore  distress,  and  dying  from 
the  bites  of  poisonous  serpents,  so  is  man  in  great  spiritual 
danger,  and  dying  from  the  poisonous  effects  of  sin. 

(&.)  As  the  serpent  of  brass  was  lifted  up  on  a  pole  in  the 
sight  of  the  camp  of  Israel,  so  Christ  was  to  be  lifted  ap  on  the 
cross  pubhcly,  and  in  the  sight  of  the  whole  nation,  at  the 
Passover. 

(c.)  As  the  serpent,  lifted  up  on  the  pole,  was  an  imacre  of 
the  very  thing  which  had  poisoned  the  Israelites,  even  so  Christ 
hai  in  Himself  no  sin,  and  yet  was  made  and  crucified  "  in  the 
likeness  of  sinful  flesh,"  and  counted  sin.  (Rom.  viii.  3.)  The 
brazen  serpent  was  a  serpent  wiihout  poison,  and  Christ  was  a 
man  without  sin.     The  thing  which  we  should  specially  see  in 

7* 


154  EXPOSITOHY  THOUGHTS.  • 

Christ  crucified,  is  our  sin  liaid  upon  Him,  and  Him  counted  as  a 
sinner,  and  treated  as  a  sinner,  and  punished  as  a  sinner,  for 
our  redemption.  In  fact  we  see  on  the  cross  our  sins  punished, 
crucified,  borne,  and  carried  by  our  Redeemer. 

(d.)  Finally,  as  the  one  way  by  which  Israehtes  obtained 
relief  from  the  brazen  serpent,  was  by  looking  at  it,  so  the  one 
way  to  get  benefit  from  Christ,  is  to  look  at  him  by  faith.  The 
feeblest  look  brought  cure  to  an  Israelite,  and  the  weakest  faith, 
if  true  and  sincere,  brings  salvation  to  sinners. 

It  should  be  carefully  noted,  that  it  seems  impossible  to  recor- 
cile  this  verse  with  that  modern  divinity  which  can  see  nothing 
in  Christ's  death  but  a  great  act  of  self-sacrifice,  and  which 
denies  Christ's  substitution  for  us  on  the  cross,  and  the  imputa- 
tion of  our  sins  to  Him.  Such  divinity  withers  upsuch  a  verse 
as  this  entirely,  and  cuts  out  the  life,  heart,  and  marrow  of  its 
meaning.  Unless  words  are  most  violently  wrested  from  their 
ordinary  signification,  the  illustration  before  us  points  directly 
towards  two  great  truths  of  the  Gospel.  One  of  them  is  that 
Christ's  death  upon  the  cross  was  meant  to  have  a  medicinal, 
health-conferring  effect  upon  our  souls,  and  that  there  was  some- 
thing in  it  fiir  above  a  mere  martyr's  example.  The  other  truth 
is,  that  when  Christ  died  upon  the  cross.  He  was  dealt  with  as 
our  Substitute  and  Representative,  and  punished,  through  the 
imputation  of  our  sins,  in  our  place.  The  thing  that  Israel  saw 
on  the  pole,  and  from  which  thny  got  health,  was  an  image  of  the 
very  serpent  that  bit  them.  The  object  that  Christians  should 
see  on  the  cross,  is  a  Divine  Person,  made  sin  and  a  curse  for 
them,  and  allowing  that  very  sin  that  has  poisoned  the  world  to 
be  imputed  to  Him,  and  laid  upon  His  head. — It  is  easy  work 
to  sneer  at  the  words  "  vicarious  sacrifice,"  and  "  imputed  merit," 
as  nowhere  to  be  found  in  Scripture.  But  it  is  not  so  easy  to 
disprove  the  fact  that  the  "  ideas"  are  constantly  to  be  met  with 
in  the  Bible. 

The  use  of  the  brazen  serpent  in  this  verse,  as  an  ilhistration 
of  Christ's  death  and  its  purpose,  must  not  be  abused,  and  made 
an  excuse  for  turning  every  incident  of  the  history  of  Israel  in 
the  wilderness  into  an  allegory.  It  is  very  important  not  to 
attach  an  allegorical  meaning  to  Bible  facts  without  authority. 
Such  things  as  the  manna,  the  smitten  rock,  and  the  brazen 
serpent,  are  allegorized  for  us  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  But  where 
the  Holy  Ghost  has  not  pointed  out  any  allegory,  we  ought  to 
be  very  cautious  in  our  as-ertions  that  allegory  exists.  Bucer's 
remarks  on  this  subject  deserve  reading. 

16. — [That  whosoever  believeth... not  perish.. .life.]  In  this  verse  our 
Lord  declares  to  Nicodemus  the  great  end  and  purpose  for  which 
the  Son  of  man  was  to  be  "  lifted  up"  on  the  cross,  and  the  way 


JOHN,    CHAP.    III.  155 

in  which  the  benefits  of  Kis  crucifixion  become  our  own.  In 
interpreting  the  verse,  we  should  carefully  remember  that  the 
comparison  of  the  serpent  lifted  up  in  the  wilderness  must  be 
carried  through  to  the  end  of  the  sentence.  The  Son  of  man 
must  be  lifted  up  on  the  cross,  that  whosoever  believeth  on  Him, 
or  looks  to  Him  by  faith,  as  the  Israelites  looked  to  the  brazen 
serpent,  should  not  perish  in  hell. 

The  expression  "whosoever,"  deserves  special  notice.  It 
might  have  been  equally  well  translated  "  every  one."  It  is 
intended  to  show  us  the  width  and  breadth  of  Christ's  offers  of 
salvation.  They  are  for  "every  one,"  without  exception,  that 
"believeth." 

The  expression  "  believeth  in  Him,"  is  deeply  important.  It 
describes  that  one  act  of  man's  soul  which  is  needful  to  give  him 
an  interest  in  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  not  a  mere  belief  of  the  head 
that  there  is  such  a  Person  as  Jesus  Christ,  and  that  He  is  a 
Saviour,  It  is  a  belief  of  the  heart  and  will:  When  a  person, 
feeling  his  desperate  need  by  reason  of  sin,  flees  to  Jesus  Christ, 
and  trusts  in  Him,  leans  on  Him,  and  commits  his  soul  entirely  to 
Him  as  his  Saviour  and  Eedeemer,  he  is  said,  in  the  language  of 
the  text,  to  "  believe  on  Him." — The  simpler  our  views  of  faith 
are,  the  better.  The  more  steadily  we  keep  in  view  the  Israelites 
looking  at  the  brazen  serpent,  the  more  we  shall  understand  the 
words  before  us.  "  Believing"  is  neither  more  nor  less  than 
heart-looking.  Whosoever  looked  at  the  brazen  serpent  was 
made  weU,  however  ill  he  was,  and  however  feeble  his  look. 
Just  so,  whosoever  looks  to  Jesus  by  faith,  is  pardoned,  however 
great  his  sins  may  have  been,  and  how^ever  feeble  his  faith. — Did 
the  Israelite  look?  That  was  the  only  question  in  the  matter  of 
being  healed  from  the  serpent's  bite. — Does  the  sinner  believe  ? 
That  is  the  only  question  in  the  matter  of  being  justified  and 
pardoned. — Looking  to  Moses,  or  looking  to  the  tabernacle,  or 
looking  even  to  the  pole  on  which  the  serpent  hung,  or  looking 
to  anything  except  the  brazen  serpent,  the  bitten  Israelite  would 
not  have  been  cured.  Just  so,  looking  to  anything  but  Christ 
crucified,  however  holy  the  object  looked  at  may  be,  the  sinner 
cannot  be  saved. 

The  expression,  "  should  not  perish,  but  have  eternal  life,"  is 
pecuharly  strong.  As  the  Israelite  who  looked  to  the  brazen 
serpent  not  only  did  not  die  of  his  wounds,  but  recovered  com- 
plete health,  so  the  sinner  who  looks  to  Jesus  not  only  escapes 
hell  and  condemnation,  but  has  a  seed  of  eternal  life  at  once  put 
in  his  heart,  receives  a  complete  title  to  an  eternal  life  of  glory 
and  blessedness  in  heaven,  and  enters  into  that  life  after  death. — 
The  salvation  of  the  Gospel  is  exceedingly  full.  It  is  not  merely 
being  pardoned.  It  is  being  counted  completely  righteous,  and 
made  a  citizen  of  heaven.    It  is  not  merely  an  escape  from  hell, 


.15)  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

but  the  reception  of  a  title  to  heaven.  It  has  been  well  remark- 
ed, that  the  Old  Testament  generally  promised  only  "  length  of 
dajs,"  but  the  Gospel  promises  "everlasting  life." 

10. — [For  God  so  loved  the  worldj  <fcc.]  Our  Lord,  in  this  verse, 
shews  Nicodemus  another  "  heavenly  thing." — Nicodemus  pro- 
bably thought,  like  many  Jews,  that  God's  purposes  of  mercy 
were  entirely  confined  to  His  chosen  people  Israel,  and  that  when 
Messiah  appeared.  He  would  appear  only  for  the  special  benefit 
of  the  Jewish  nation.  Our  Lord  here  declares  to  him  that  God 
loves  all  the  world  without  any  exception,  that  the  Messiah, 
the  only  begotten  Son  of  God,  is  the  Father's  gift  to  the  whole 
vfamily  of  Adam,  and  that  every  one,  whether  Jew  or  Gentile, 
who  believes  on  Him  for  salvation,  may  have  eternal  life. — A 
more  startling  declaration  to  the  ears  of  a  rigid  Pharisee  it  is 
impossible  to  conceive !  A  more  wonderful  verse  is  not  to  be 
found  in  the  Bible  I  That  God  should  love  such  a  wicked  world 
as  this  and  not  hate  it, — that  He  should  love  it  so  as  to  provide 
salvation — that  in  order  to  provide  salvation  He  should  give,  not 
an  angel,  or  any  created  being,  but  such  a  priceless  gift  as  His 
only  begotten  Son, — that  this  great  salvation  should  be  freely 
offered  to  every  one  that  believeth, — all,  all  this  is  wonderful  in- 
deed 1     This  was  indeed  a  "  heavenly  thing." 

The  words,  "  God  loved  the  world,"  have  received  two  very 
different  interpretations.  The  importance  of  the  subject  in  the 
present  day  makes  it  desirable  to  state  both  views  fully. 

Some  think,  as  Hutcheson,  Lampe,  and  Gill,  that  the  "  world  " 
here  means  God's  elect  out  of  every  nation,  whether  Jews  or 
Gentiles,  and  that  the  "  love"  with  which  God  is  said  to  love 
them  is  that  eternal  love  with  which  the  elect  were  loved  before 
creation  began,  and  by  which  their  calling,  justification,  pre- 
servation and  final  salvation  are  completely  secured. — This  view, 
though  supported  by  many  and  great  divines,  does  not  appear- 
to  me  to  be  our  Lord's  meaning.  For  one  thing,  it  seems  to  me 
a  violent  straining  of  language  to  confine  the  word  ''  world  "  to 
the  elect.  "  The  world"  is  undoubtedly  a  name  sometimes  given 
to  the  "  wicked  "  exclusively.  But  I  cannot  see  that  it  is  a  name 
ever  given  to  the  saints. — For  another  thing,  fo  interpret  the 
word  "  world "  of  the  elect  only  is  to  ignore  the  distinction 
which,  to  my  eyes,  is  plainly  drawn  in  the  text  between  the 
whole  of  mankind  and  those  out  of  mankind  who  ''  believe." 
If  the  "world"  means  only  the  believing  portion  of  mankind, 
it  would  have  been  quite  enough  to  say,  "  God  so  loved  the 
world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  the  world  sliould 
not  perish."  But  our  Lord  does  not  say  so.  He  says,  ''  that 
whosoever  believeth,  i.  e.,  that  whosoever  out  of  the  world  be- 
lieveth."—Lastly,  to  confine  God's  love  to  the  elect,  is  taking  a 


JOHN     CHAP     III.  157 

harsh  and  narrow  view  of  God's  character,  and  fairly  lays 
Christiar.ity  open  to  the  modern  charges  brought  against  it  as 
cruel  and  unjust  to  the  ungodly.  If  Grod  takes  no  thought  for 
any  but  his  elect,  and  cares  for  none  beside,  how  shall  God  judge 
the  world  ? — I  believe  in  the  electing  love  of  God  the  Father  as 
stro-  gly  as  any  one.  I  regard  the  special  love  with  which  God 
loves  the  sheep  whom  He  has  given  to  Christ  from  all  eternity, 
as  a  most  blessed  and  comfortable  truth,  and  one  most  cheering 
and  profitable  to  beUevers.  I  only  say,  that  it  is  not  the  truth  of 
this  text. 

The  true  view  of  the  words,  "  God  loved  the  world,"  I  believe 
to  be  this.  The  "  world "  means  the  whole  race  of  mankind, 
both  saints  and  sinners,  without  any  exception.  The  word,  in 
my  opinion,  is  so  used  in  John  i.  10,  29 ;  vi.  33,  51 ;  viii.  12. — 
Rom.  iii.  19.— 2  Cor.  v.  19.— 1  John  ii.  2;  iv.  U.  The  "love" 
spoken  of  is  that  love  of  pity  aad  compassion  with  which  God 
regards  all  His  creatures,  and  specially  regards  mankind.  It  is 
the  same  feehng  of  "love"  which  appears  in  Psalm  cxlv.  9, — 
Ezek.  xxxiii.  11  —John  vi.  32.— Titus  iii.  4.— 1  John  iv.  10.— 
2  Pet.  iii.  9. — 1  Tim.  ii.  4.  It  is  a  love  unquestionably  distinct 
and  separate  from  the  special  love  with  which  God  regards  His 
saints.  It  is  a  love  of  pity  and  not  of  approbation  or  complais- 
ance. But  it  is  not  the  less  a  real  love.  It  is  a  love  which 
clears  God  of  injustice  in  judging  the  world. 

I  am  quite  familiar  with  the  objections  commonly  brought 
against  the  theory  I  have  just  propounded.  I  find  no  weight 
in  them,  and  am  not  careful  to  answer  them.  Those  who  con- 
fine God's  love  exclusively  to  the  elect  appear  to  me  t  >  take  a 
narrow  and  contracted  view  of  God's  character  and  attributes. 
They  refuse  to  God  that  attribute  of  compassion  with  which  even 
an  earthly  father  can  regard  a  profligate  son,  and  can  ofifer  to  him 
pardon,  even  though  his  compassion  is  despised  and  his  offers 
refused.  I  have  long  come  to  the  conclusion  that  men  may  be 
more  systematic  in  their  statements  than  the  Bible,  and  may  be 
led  into  grave  error  by  idolatrous  veneration  of  a  system.  The 
following  quotation  from  one  whom  for  convenience  sake  I  must 
call  a  thorough  Calvinist,  I  mean  Bishop  Davenant,  will  show 
that  the  view  I  advocate  is  not  new. 

''  The  general  love  of  God  toward  mankind  is  so  clearly  tes- 
tified in  Holy  Scripture,  and  so  demonstrated  by  the  manifold 
effects  of  God's  goodness  and  mercy  extended  to  every  par- 
ticular man  in  this  world,  that  to  doubt  thereof  were  infidelity, 
and  to  deny  it  plain  blasphemy." — Davenanfs  Answer  to  Hoard, 
p.l. 

"God  hateth  nothing  which  Himself  created.  And  yet  it  is 
most  true  that  He  hateth  sin  in  any  creature,  and  hateth  -the 


158  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

creature  infected  with  sin,  in  such  manner  as  hatred  may  be 
attributed  to  Q-od.  But  for  all  this  He  so  generally  loved  man- 
kind, fallen  in  Adam,  that  He  hath  given  His  only  begotten 
Son^  that  what  sinner  soever  believeth  in  Him  should  not  perish 
but  have  everlasting  life.  And  this  everlasting  life  is  so  provided 
for  man  by  God,  that  no  decrees  of  His  can  bring  any  man  thither 
without  faith  and  repentance ;  and  no  decrees  of  His  can  keep 
any  man  out  who  repenteth  and  beheveth.  As  for  the  measure 
of  God's  love  exhibited  in  the  external  effect  unto  man,  it  must 
not  be  denied  that  God  poureth  out  His  grace  more  abundantly 
on  some  men  than  on  others,  and  worketh  more  powerfully  and 
effectually  in  the  hearts  of  some  men  than  of  other:?,  and  that  out 
of  His  alone  will  and  pleasure.  But  yet,  when  this  more  special 
love  is  not  extended,  His  less  special  love  is  not  restrained  to 
outward  and  temporal  mercies,  but  reacheth  to  internal  and 
spiritual  blessings,  even  such  as  will  bring  men  to  an  eternal 
blessedness,  if  their  voluntary  wickedness  hinders  not." — Dave- 
nanfs  Answer  to  Hoard^  p.  469. 

"  No  divine  of  the  Reformed  Church,  of  sound  judgment,  will 
deny  a  general  intention  or  appointment  concerning  the  salvation 
of  all  men  individually  by  the  death  of  Christ,  on  the  condition 
if  they  should  believe.  For  the  intention  or  appointment  of 
God  is  general,  and  is  plainly  revealed  in  holy  Scripture,  although 
the  absolute  and  not  to  be  frustrated  intention  of  God  concerning 
the  gift  of  faith  and  eternal  life  to  some  persons,  is  special,  and 
limited  to  the  elect  alone.  So  I  have  maintained  and  do  main- 
tain."— Davenanfs  Opinion  on  the  Gallican  Controversy. 

Calvin  observes  on  this  text,  "  Christ  brought  life,  because  the 
heavenly  Father  loves  the  human  race,  and  wishes  that  they 
should  not  perish,"  Again  he  says,  ''  Christ  employed  the  uni- 
versal term  whosoever^  both  to  invite  indiscriminately  all  to  par- 
take of  hfe,  and  to  cut  off  every  excuse  from  unbelievers.  Such 
also  is  the  import  of  the  term  world.  Though  there  is  nothing 
in  the  world  that  is  worthy  of  God's  favour,  yet  He  shows  Him- 
self to  be,  reconciled  to  the  whole  world,  when  He  invites  all 
men  without  exception  to  the  faith  of  Christ." 

The  same  view  of  God's  "  love"  and  the  "  world,"  in  this  text, 
is  taken  by  Brentius,  Bucer,  Calovius,  Glassius,  Chemnitius, 
Musculus.  Bullinger,  Bengel,  Nifanius,  Dyke,  Scott,  Henry,  and 
Man  ton. 

The  little  word  "  so,"  in  this  verse,  has  called  forth  many  re- 
marks, on  account  of  its  depth  of  meaning.  It  doubtless  signifies 
"  so  greatly,  so  much,  so  dearly."  Bishop  Sanderson,  quoted  by 
Ford,  observes,  "How  much  that  'so'  containeth,  no  tongue  or 
wit  of  man  cai  reach :  nothing  expresseth  it  better  to  the  life, 
than  the  work  .tself  doth." 


JOHN,   CHAP.   III.  159 

[^That  he  gave  his  only  hegotten  Sonl  The  gift  of  Christ,  be  it 
here  noted,  is  the  result  of  God's  love  to  the  world,  and  not  the 
cause.  To  say  that  Go. I  loves  us  because  Christ  died  for  us,  is 
wretched  theology  indeed.  But  to  say  that  Christ  came  into  the 
world  in  consequence  of  the  love  of  God,  is  scriptural  truth. 

The  expression  "  he  gave,"  is  a  remarkable  one.  Christ  is  God 
the  Father's  gift  to  a  lost  and  sinful  world.  He  was  given  gene- 
rally to  be  the  Saviour,  the  Redeemer,  tl^e  Friend  of  sinners, — to 
make  an  atonement  sufficient  for  all, — and  to  provide  a  re- 
demption large  enough  for  all.  To  e£fect  this,  the  Father  freely 
gave  Him  up  to  be  despised,  rejected,  mocked,  crucified,  and 
counted  guilty  and  accursed  for  our  sakes.  It  is  written  that  He 
was  "  delivered  for  our  offences,"  and  that  ''  God  spared  Him  not, 
but  delivered  him  up  for  us  all."  (Rom.  iv.  25 ;  viii.  32.)  Christ 
is  the  "  gift  of  God,"  spoken  of  to  the  Samaritan  woman,  (John 
iv.  10,)  and  the  "  unspeakable  gift"  spoken  of  by  St.  Paul.  (2 
Cor.  ix.  15.)  He  Himself  says  to  the  wicked  Jews,  "My  Father 
giveth  you  the  true  bread  from  heaven."  (John  vi.  32.)  This  last 
text,  be  it  noted,  was  one  with  which  Erskine  silenced  the 
General  Assembly  in  Scotland,  when  he  was  accused  of  offering 
Christ  too  freely  to  sinners. 

It  should  be  observed  that  our  Lord  calls  Himself  "  the  only 
begotten  Son  of  God"  in  this  verse.  In  the  verse  but  one  before 
this.  He  called  Himself  "  the  Son  of  man."  Both  the  names  were 
used  in  order  to  impress  upon  the  mind  of  Nicodemus  the  two 
natures  of  Messiah.  He  was  not  only  the  Son  of  man  but  the 
Son  of  God.  But  it  is  striking  to  remark  that  precisely  the  same 
words  are  used  in  both  places  about  faith  in  Christ.  If  we  would 
be  saved,  we  must  beheve  in  Him  both  as  the  Son  of  man  and 
the  Son  of  God. 

[That  whosoever  believefh,  (S)C.,..Jife.]  These  words  are  exactly 
the  same  as  those  in  the  preceding  verse.  Why  our  translators 
should  have  rendered  the  same  Greek  word  by  "everlasting" 
in  one  place,  and  '*  eternal "  in  the  other,  it  is  hard  to  say.  In 
Matt.  XXV.  46,  they  did  just  the  same. 

The  repetition  of  this  glorious  saying,  "whosoever  believeth," 
is  very  instructive.  For  one  thing  it  serves  to  show  that  mighty 
and  broad  as  is  the  love  of  God,  it  will  prove  useless  to  every  one 
who  does  not  believe  in  Christ.  God  loves  all  the  world,  but 
God  will  save  none  in  the  world  who  refuse  to  believe  in  His 
only  begotten  Son, — For  another  thing  it  shows  us  the  great 
point  to  which  every  Christian  should  direct  his  attention.  He 
must  tee  to  it  that  he  beheves  on  Christ.  It  is  mere  wasfe  of 
time  to  be  constantly  asking  ourselves  whether  God  loves  us, 
and  whether  Christ  died  for  us ;  and  it  argues  gross  ignorance  of 
Scripture  to  trouble  ourselves  with  such  questions.     The  Bible 


160  EXPOSITORY  IHOUGHTS. 

never  telh  men  to  look  at  these  questions,  but  commands  them 
to  beheve.  Salvation,  it  always  teaches,  does  not  turn  on  the 
point,  "  did  Christ  die  for  me  ?"  but  on  the  point,  "  do  I  believe 
on  Christ  ?"  If  men  do  not  '^  have  eternal  life,"  it  is  never  because 
God  did  not  love  them,  or  because  Christ  was  not  given  for  them, 
but"  because  they  do  not  believe  on  Christ. 

In  leaving  this  verse,  I  may  remark,  that  the  idea  maintained 
by  Erasmus,  Olshausen,  Wetstein,  Rosenmuller,  and  others,  that 
it  does  not  contain  our  Lord's  words,  and  that  from  this  verse 
down  to  the  21st  we  have  St.  John's  comments  or  observations, 
appears  to  me  utterly  destitute  of  foundation,  and  unsupported 
by  a  single  argument  worth  noticing.  That  our  Lord  would  not 
have  used  the  third  person  in  speaking  of  Himself  is  no  argu- 
ment. We  find  Him  frequently  speaking  of  Himself  in  the  third 
person.  See,  for  instance,  John  v.  19,  29.  There  is  literally  no- 
thing to  be  gained  by  adopting  the  theory,  w^iile  it  contradicta 
the  common  belief  of  nearly  all  believers  in  every  age  of  the 
world. 

Flacius  observes  that  this  verse  and  the  two  preceding  ones 
comprise  all  the  causes  of  justification :  1.  The  remote  and 
efficient  cause,  Grod's  love.  2.  The  approximate  efficient  cause, 
the  gift  of  Grod's  Son.  3.  The  material  cause,  Christ's  exaltation 
on  the  cross.  4.  The  instrumental  cause,  faith.  5.  The  final 
cause,  eternal  hfe. 

17. — [  God  sent  not....condemn... .world.']  In  this  verse  our  Lord  shows 
Nicodemus  another  ''heavenly  thing."  He  shows  him  the  main 
object  of  Messiah  coming  into  the  world.  It  was  not  to  judge 
men,  but  to  die  for  them  ;  not  to  condemn,  but  to  save. 

I  have  a  strong  impression  that  when  our  Lord  spoke  these 
words,  He  had  in  view  the  prophecy  of  David  about  Messiah 
bruising  the  nations  with  a  rod  of  iron,  and  Daniel's  prophecy 
about  the  judgment,  where  he  speaks  of  the  thrones  being  cast 
down,  and  the  Ancient  of  days  judging  the  world.  (Psalm  ii.  6 — 
9:  Dan.  vii.  9—22.)  I  think  that  Nicodemus.  like  most  Jews, 
was  filled  with  the  expectation  that  when  Messinh  came  He 
would  come  with  power  and  great  glory,  and.  judge  all  men.  Our 
Lord  corrects  this  notion  in  this  verse.  He  declares  that  Messiah's 
first  advent  was  not  to  judge  but  to  save  people  from  their  sins. 
He  says  in  another  place.  "  I  came  r»ot  to  judge  the  world,  but 
to  save  the  world."  (John  xii.  47.)  The  Q-reek  word  for  judging 
and  condemning,  it  must  be  remembered,  is  one  and  the  same. 
Judgment  and  the  condemnation  of  the  ungodly,  our  Lord  would 
have  us  know,  are  not  the  work  of  the  first  advent,  but  of  the 
second.  The  special  work  of  the  first  advent  was  to  seek  and 
save  that  which  was  lost. 

[That....iuorld.... through     Him. ...saved.]     This    sentence    must 


JOHN,    CHAP.    IIT.  161 

deafly  be  interpreted  with  some  qualification.  It  would  contra- 
dict other  plain  texts  of  Scripture,  if  we  took  it  to  mean,  "God 
sent  His  Son  into  the  world,  that  all  the  world  might  finally  be 
saved  through  Him,  and  none  be  lost."  In  fact,  our  Lord  Him- 
self declares  in  the  very  next  verse,  "  that  he  that  beiieveth  not 
is  condemned   already." 

The  meaning  of  the  sentence  evidently  is,  that  "  all  the  world 
might  have  a  door  of  salvation  opened  through  Christ, — that 
salvation  might  be  provided  for  all  the  world, — and  that  so  any 
one  in  the  world  beheving  on  Christ,  might  be  saved."  In  this 
view  it  is  hke  the  expression  of  St.  John,  *'  The  Father  sent  the 
Son  to  be  the  Saviour  of  the  world."  (1  John  iv.  14.) 

The  expression,  "  God  hath  sent,"  in  this  verse,  ought  not  to 
be  overlooked.  It  is  very  frequently  applied,  in  St.  John's  Gos- 
pel, to  our  Lord.  At  least  thirty-eight  times  we  find  Him  speaking 
of  Himself  as  Him  "  whom  God  hath  sent."  It  is  probably  fronc 
this  expression  that  St.  Paul  derives  the  peculiar  name  whicli 
he  gives  to  our  Lord,  "  The  apostle  of  our  profession."  (Heb.  iii. 
1.)    The  apostle  means  simply,    *'  The  sent  one." 

The  readiness  of  natural  man  everywhere  to  regard  Christ  as 
a  Judge  much  more  than  as  a  Saviour,  is  a  curious  fact.  The 
whole  system  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  is  fuU  of  the  idea. 
People  are  taught  to  be  afraid  of  Christ,  and  to  flee  to  the  Virgin 
Mary  !  Ignorant  Protestants  are  not  much  better.  They  often 
regard  Christ  as  a  kind  of  Judge,  whose  demands  they  will  have 
to  satisfy  at  the  last  day,  much  more  than  as  a  present  personal 
Saviour  and  Friend.  Our  Lord  f«eems  to  foresee  this  error,  and 
to  correct  it  in  the  words  of  this  text. 

Calvin  observes  on  this  verse,  "  Whenever  our  sins  press  us, — 
whenever  Satan  would  drive  us  to  despair, — we  ought  to  hold 
out  this  shield,  that  God  is  unwiUing  that  we  should  be  over- 
whelmed with  everlasting  destruction,  because  He  has  appointed 
His  Son  to  be  the  salvation  of  the  world." 

18. — [He  that  helieveth  on  JIim....is  not  condemned.]  In  this  verse 
our  Lord  shows  Nicodemus  another  "heavenly  thing."  He  do- 
clares  the  privileges  of  believing,  and  the  peril  of  not  believing 
in  the  Son  of  God.  Nico  lemus  had  addressed  Him  as  a  "  teacher 
come  from  Gol."  He  would  have  Nicodemus  know  that  He 
was  that  high  and  holy  One,  to  believe  on  whom  was  hfe  eter- 
nal, and  not  to  believe  on  whom  was  everlasting  destruction. 
Life  or  death  was  before  men.  If  they  believed  and  received 
Him  as  the  Messiah,  they  would  be  saved.  If  they  beheved  not, 
they  would  die  in  their  sins. 

The  expression,  "  He  that  beiieveth,"  deserves  special  notice. 
It  is  the  third  time  that  our  Lord  speaks  of  "  believing "  on 


162  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Himself,  and  the  consequence  of  believing,  within  four  verses. 
It  shows  the  immense  importance  of  faith  in  the  sinner's  justi- 
fication. It  is  that  one  thing,  without  which  eternal  life  cannot 
be  had. — It  shows  the  amazing  graciousness  of  the  Gospel,  and 
its  admirable  suitableness  to  the  wants  of  human  nature. — A 
man  may  have  been  the  worst  of  sinners,  but  if  he  will  only 
"  believe,"  he  is  at  once  pardoned.  Last,  but  not  least,  it  shows 
the  need  of  clear,  distinct  views  of  the  nature  of  saving  faith, 
and  the  importance  of  keeping  it  entirely  distinct  from  works  or 
any  kind,  in  the  matter  of  justification.  Faith,  and  faith  only, 
gives  an  interest  in  Christ.  The  old  sentence  of  Luther's  day8 
is  perfectly  true, — paradoxical  and  startling  as  it  may  sound, 
"  The  faith  which  justifies  is  not  the  faith  which  includes  charity, 
but  the  faith  which  lays  hold  on  Christ." 

The  expression,  "  is  not  condemned,"  is  equivalent  to  saying, 
"he  is  pardoned,  acquitted,  justified,  cleared  from  a-l  guilt, 
delivered  from  the  curse  of  a  broken  law,  no  longer  counted  a 
sinner,  but  reckoned  perfectly  righteous  in  the  sight  of  God." 
The  presentness  of  the  phrase,  if  one  may  coin  a  word,  should  be 
specially  noticed.  It  is  not  said,  that  the  believer  "shall  not 
be  condemned  at  the  last  day,"  but  that  "  he  is  not  condemned." 
The  very  moment  a  sinner  believes  on  Christ,  his  iniquities  are 
taken  away,  and  he  is  counted  righteous.  "  All  that  beUeve  are 
justified  from  all  things."  (Acts  xiii.  39.) 

[ffe....helieveth  not... condemned  already.]  This  sentence  means 
that  the  man  who  refuses  to  believe  on  Christ  is  in  a  state  of 
condemnation  before  God,  even  while  he  lives.  The  curse  of  a 
broken  law,  which  we  all  deserve,  is  upon  him.  His  sins  are 
upon  his  head.  He  is  reckoned  guilty  and  dead  before  God,  and 
there  is  but  a  step  between  him  and  hell.  Faith  takes  all  a 
man's  sins  away.  Unbelief  keeps  them  all  on  him.  Through 
faith  a  man  is  made  an  heir  of  heaven,  though  kept  outside  till 
he  dies.  Through  unbelief  a  man  is  already  a  subject  of  the 
devil,  though  not  yet  entirely  in  his  power,  and  within  hell.  The 
moment  a  man  believes,  all  charges  are  completely  wiped  away 
from  his  name.  So  long  as  a  man  does  not  believe,  his  sins 
cover  him  over,  and  make  him  abominable  before  God,  and  the 
just  wrath  of  God  abides  upon  him. 

Melancthon  remarks  that  the  sentence  of  God's  condemnation, 
which  was  passed  at  the  beginning,  "  Thou  shalt  surely  die," 
remains  in  full  force  and  unrepealed,  against  every  one  who  does 
not  believe  on  Christ.  No  new  condemnation  is  needful.  Every 
man  or  woman  who  does  not  believe,  is  under  the  curse,  and 
condemned  already. 

[Because.. ..not  believed.. ..name.... Son  of  God.]  This  sentence 
is  justly  thought  to  prove  that  no  sin  is  so  great,  and  so  damning 


JOHN,    CEIAP.    IIT.  163 

and  ruinous  to  the  soul  as  unbelief.  In  one  sense  it  is  the  only 
unpardonable  sin.  All  other  sins  may  be  forgiven,  however  many 
and  great,  and  a  man  may  stand  complete  before  God.  But  if  a 
man  will  not  believe  on  Christ,  there  is  no  hope  for  him  ;  and  if 
he  persists  in  his  unbelief  he  cannot  be  saved.  Nothing  is  so 
provoking  and  offensive  to  God  as  to  refuse  the  glorious  salvation 
He  has  provided  at  so  mighty  a  cost,  by  the  death  of  His  only 
begotten  Son.  Nothing  is  so  suicidal  on  the  part  of  man  as  to 
turn  away  from  the  only  remedy  which  can  heal  his  soul.  Other 
sins  may  be  scarlet,  filthy,  and  abominable.  But  not  to  believe 
on  Christ  is  to  bar  the  door  in  our  own  way,  and  to  cut  off  our- 
selves entirely  from  heaven.  It  has  been  truly  remarked  that  it 
was  a  greater  sin  in  Judas  Iscariot  not  to  believe  on  Christ  for 
pardon,  after  he  had  betrayed  Him,  than  to  betray  Him  into  the 
hands  of  his  enemies.  To  betray  Him  no  doubt  was  an  act  of 
enormous  covetousness,  wickedness,  and  ingratitude.  But  not 
to  seek  Him  afterwards  by  faith  for  pardon,  was  to  disbelieve 
His  mercy,  love,  and  power  to  save. 

The  expression  "  the  name,"  as  the  object  of  faith,  is  explained 
in  chap.  i.  12.  Here,  as  frequently,  it  stands  for  the  attributeg, 
character,  and  oflBce  of  the  Son  of  God. 

Luther,  quoted  by  Brown,  remarks,  "  Henceforward,  he  who 
is  condemned  must  not  complain  of  Adam,  and  his  inborn  sin. 
The  seed  of  the  woman,  promised  by  God  to  bruise  the  head  of 
the  serpent,  is  now  come  and  has  atoned  for  sin,  and  taken  away 
condemnation.  But  he  must  cry  out  against  himself  for  not  hav- 
ing accepted  and  believed  in  the  Christ,  the  devil's  head-bruiser 
and  sin-strangler.  If  I  do  not  beheve  the  same,  sin  and  condem- 
nation must  continue." 

19. — [This  is  the  condemnation,  Sc]  In  this  verse  our  Lord  shows 
Nicodemus  one  more  "  heavenly  thing."  He  unfolds  to  him  the 
true  cause  of  the  ruin  of  those  who  are  lost.  Primarily,  I  think, 
our  Lord  had  in  view  the  unbelieving  Jews  of  His  own  day, 
and  the  real  reason  of  their  rejection  of  Himself.  It  was  not 
that  there  was  any  want  of  evidence  of  His  Messiahship.  They 
had  evidence  enough  and  to  spare.  The  real  reason  was  that  they 
had  no  mind  to  give  up  their  sins. — Secondarily,  I  think,  our 
Lord  had  in  view  the  future  history  of  all  Christians,  and  the 
true  cause  of  the  ruin  of  all  who  are  not  saved  in  every  age.  It 
is  not  because  there  is  any  want  of  light  to  guide  men  to  heaven. 
It  is  not  because  God  is  wanting  in  love  and  unwilling  to  save. 
The  real  reason  is  that  men  in  every  age  love  their  own  sin&,  and 
will  not  come  to  Christ  that  they  may  be  delivered  from  them. 

The  espression  "this  is  the  condemnation,"  is  evidently  very 
elliptical,  «,nd  the  full  meaning  must  be  supplied.  It  is  probably 
equivalent  to  saying  "  this  is  the  cause  of  the  condemnation,  this 


164  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

is  the  true  account  of  it."  The  following  elliptical  expresRiona 
are  somewhat  similar,  and  all  found  in  St.  John's  1st  Epistle. 
"  This  is  the  promise,"  "  this  is  the  love  of  Grod,"  "  this  is  the 
victory,"  "  this  is  the  confidence."  (1  John  ii.  25. — t.  4,  14.) 

[That  light  is  come  into  the  world.]  It  is  a  question  in  this 
sentence  whether  "  light "  means  Christ  Himself,  or  the  light  of 
Christ's  Gospel.  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  our  Lord  meant  to 
include  both  ideas.  He  has  come  as  a  light  into  the  world,  and 
the  Gospel  that  He  has  brought  with  Him,  is,  like  its  Author,  a 
strong  contrast  to  the  ignorance  and  wickedness  of  the  earth. 

[Men  loved  darkness  rather  than  lightj]  The  darkness  in  this 
sentence  means  moral  darkness  and  mental  darkness,  sin,  igno- 
rance, superstition,  and  irreligion.  Men  cannot  come  to  Christ 
and  receive  His  Gospel  without  parting  with  all  this,  and  they 
love  it  too  well  to  part  with  it. 

[Because  their  deeds  were  evil.]  This  sentence  means  that  their 
habits  of  life  were  wicked,  and  any  doctrine  which  necessitated 
a  change  of  these  habits  they  naturally  hated. 

Throughout  this  verse  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  the  past 
tense  "  loved,"  ought  to  be  taken  in  a  present  sense,  (prolepti- 
cally,  to  use  a  grammarian's  phrase,)  as  is  frequently  the  case  in 
the  New  Testament.  See  John  xv.  8,  and  Rom.  viii.  30.  The 
meaning  will  then  be,  "  men  have  loved,  do  love,  and  always 
will  love  darkness,  in  consequence  of  the  corruption  of  human 
nature,  as  long  as  the  world  stands."  The  sentence  then  becomes 
a  solemn  description  of  a  state  of  things  which  was  not  only  to 
be  seen  among  the  Jews,  while  our  Lord  was  on  eart!),  but 
would  be  seen  everywhere  to  the  end  of  time. 

The  verse  is  one  which  deserves  special  notice,  because  of  the 
deep  mystery  it  unfolds.  It  tells  us  the  true  reason  why  men 
miss  heaven  and  are  lost  in  hell.  The  origin  of  evil  we  aie  not 
told.  The  reason  why  evil  men  are  lest,  we  are  told  plainly. 
There  is  not  a  word  about  any  decree  of  God  predestinating  men 
to  destruction.  Tljere  is  not  a  syllable  about  anything  deficient  or 
wanting  either  in  God's  love,  or  in  Christ's  atonement.  On  ^he 
contrary  our  Lord  tells  us  that  "light  has  come  into  the  world," 
that  God  has  revealed  enough  of  the  wav  of  salvation  to  make 
men  inexcusable  if  thi-y  are  not  saved.  But  the  real  aecotmt  of 
the  matter  is  that  men  have  naturally  no  wiU  or  inclination  to 
use  the  light.  Tiiey  love  their  own  dark  and  ci  rrupt  ways  more 
than  the  ways  which  God  proposes  to  them.  They  therefore 
reap  the  fruit  of  their  own  ways,  and  wiU  have  at  last  what  they 
loved.  They  loved  darkness  and  they  will  be  cast  nto  outt-r 
darkness,  they  did  not  like  the  light  and  so  they  \^ill  be  shut 
out  from  light  eternally.  In  short,  lost  souls  will  be  what  they 
willed  to  be,  and  will  have  what  they  loved. 


•165 

The  words,  ''because  their  deeds  were  evil,"  are  very  instruc- 
tive. They  teach  ns  that  where  men  have  no  love  to  Christ  and 
His  Gospel-  and  will  not  receive  them,  their  lives  and  their  works 
will  prove  at  last  to  have  been  evil.  Their  habits  of  life  may 
not  be  gross  and  immoral.  They  may  be  even  compai-atively 
decent  and  pure.  But  the  last  day  will  prove  them  to  have  been 
in  reality  "  evil."  Pride  of  intellect,  or  selfishness,  or  love  of 
man's  applause,  or  dislike  to  submission  of  will,  or  self-righteoua- 
ness,  or  some  other  false  principle  will  be  found  to  have  run 
through  all  their  conduct.  In  one  way  or  another,  when  men 
refuse  to  come  to  Christ,  their  deeds  will  always  prove  to  be 
"  evil."  Rejection  of  the  Gospel  will  alwa3^s  be  found  to  be  con- 
nected with  some  moral  obliquity.  When  Christ  is  refused  we 
may  be  quite  sure  that  there  is  something  or  other  in  life,  or 
heart,  which  is  not  right.  If  a  man  does  not  love  light  his 
"  deeds  are  evil."  Human  eyes  may  not  detect  the  flaw ;  but 
the  eyes  of  an  all-seeing  God  do. 

The  whole  verse  is  a  deeply  humbling  one.  It  shows  the  folly 
of  all  excuses  for  not  receiving  the  Gospel,  drawn  from  intel- 
lectual difficulties,  from  God's  predestination,  from  our  own  in- 
ability to  change  ourselves,  or  to  see  things  with  the  eyes  of 
others.  All  such  excuses  are  scattered  to  the  winds  by  this 
feolemn  verse.  People  do  not  come  to  Christ,  and  do  continue 
unconverted,  just  because  they  do  not  wish  and  want  to  come  to 
Christ,  They  love  something  else  better  than  the  light.  The 
elect  of  God  prove  themselves  to  be  elect  by  '' choosing"  the 
things  which  are  according  to  God's  mind.  The  wicked  prove 
themselves  to  be  only  fit  for  destruction,  by  "  choosing,  loving, 
and  following  "  the  things  which  must  lead  to  destruction. 

Quesnel  says  on  this  verse,  "  The  greatest  misfortune  of  men 
does  not  consist  in  their  being  subject  to  sin,  corruption,  and 
bhndness ;  but  in  their  rejecting  the  Deliverer,  the  Physician, 
and  the  Light  itself." 

20. — [Every  one  that  doeth  evil,  &c.,  t&c]  This  verse  and  the 
following  one  form  a  practical  application  of  all  that  our  Lord 
has  been  saying  to  Nicodemus,  and  are  also  a  logical  consequence 
of  the  preceding  verse.  Like  the  preceding  verse,  these  two 
verses  apply  primarily  to  the  Jews  in  our  Lord's  day,  and 
secondarily  to  every  nation  to  which  the  light  of  the  Gospel 
comes.  They  are  a  most  remarkaljle  appeal  to  an  inquirer's 
conscience,  and  supply  a  most  searching  test  of  the  sincerity  of 
a  man  in  Nicodemus'  state  of  mind. 

The  words  '•'  eve;y  one  that  doeth  evil,"  mean  every  uncon- 
verted person,  every  one  whose  heart  is  not  right  and  honest  in 
God's  sight,  and  whose  actions  are  consequently  evil  and  un- 
godly.    Every  such  person  "  hateth  the  light,  neither  cometh  to 


166  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

the  light."     He  cannot  really  love  Christ  and  the  Gospel,  and 

will  not  honestly,  and  with  his  whole  heart,  seek  Christ  by  faith 
and  embrace  His  Go=^pel,  until  he  is  renewed  The  reason  of 
this  is,  that  every  unconverted  person  shrinks  from  having  his 
ungodhness  exposed.  He  does  not  wish  his  wicked  way-*  to  be 
discovered,  and  his  utter  want  of  true  righteousness  and  true 
preparedness  for  Jeath,  judgment,  and  eternity  to  be  put  to 
shame.  He  does  not  "like  his  deeds  to  be  reproved,"  and 
therefore  he  shrinks  from  the  light,  and  keeps  away  from 
Christ. 

The  apphcation  of  this  verse  must  doubtless  be  made  with 
caution.  In  the  case  of  many  unconverted  persons,  its  truth  is 
plain  as  noon-day.  They  love  sin  and  hate  true  religion,  and 
get  away  from  the  Gospel,  the  Bible,  and  religious  people  as 
much  as  they  possibly  can.  In  the  case  of  others,  its  truth 
is  not  so  apparent  at  first  sight.  There  are  many  unconverted 
persons  who  profess  to  like  the  Gospel,  and  seem  to  have  no 
prejudice  aa^ainst  it,  and  to  hear  it  with  pleasure,  and  yet  remain 
unconverted.  Yet  even  in  the  case  of  those  persons  the  text 
would  be  found  perfectly  true  if  their  hearts  were  really 
known.  With  all  their  seeming  love  to  the  light  they  do  not 
really  love  it  with  all  their  heart.  There  is  something  or  other 
which  they  love  better,  and  which  keeps  them  back  from  Christ. 
There  is  something  or  other  which  they  do  not  want  to  give  up, 
and  do  not  hke  to  be  discovered  and  reproved.  Man's  eyes  may 
not  detect  it ;  but  the  eyes  of  God  can.  The  general  principle 
of  the  text  will  be  found  true  at  last  of  every  hearer  of  the  Gos- 
pel who  dies  unconverted.  He  did  not  thoroughly  love  the  light. 
He  did  not  really  want  to  be  changed.  He  did  not  truly  and 
honestly  seek  salvation.  All  this  wos  true  of  the  Jews  in  the 
time  of  Nicodemus,  and  it  is  no  less  true  of  all  mankind  to 
whom  the  Gospel  comes  in  the  present  day.  Right  hearts  will 
always  come  to  Christ.  If  a  man  keeps  away  from  the  light,  his 
heart  is  wrong.     He  is  one  who  "doeth  evil." 

There  is  a  curious  difiference  between  the  Greek  word  trans- 
lated "  doeth"  in  this  verse  and  the  one  translated  "  doeth"  in  the 
next  verse.  Stier  and  Alford  think  the  difference  instructive  and 
meaning.  They  say  that  the  Greek  word  used  for  "  doeth  evil," 
means  the  habit  of  action  without  fruit  or  result.  On  the  con- 
trary, the  Greek  word  for  "doing  truth,"  signifies  the  true  doing 
of  good,  good  fruit,  good  that  remains. 

21. — [He  tJiat  doeth  truth,  &c.]  This  verse,  it  is  needless  to  say, 
is  closely  connected  with  the  preceding  one.  The  preceding 
verse  describes  the  unconverted  man.  The  verse  before  us  de- 
scribes the  converted  man. 

The  expression,  "  He  that  doeth  truth,"  signifies,  the  person 


JOHN,    CHAP.    III.  167 

whose  heart  is  honest,  the  man  who  is  truly  converted,  however 
weak  and  ignorant,  and  whose  heart  and  actions  are  consequently 
true  and  right  in  the  sight  of  God.  Tlie  phrase  is  frequently 
found  in  St.  Joljn's  writings.  (S-'e  John  xviii.  37 ;  1  Tohn  i.  G—  8; 
ii.  4;  iii.  19;  2  John  i. ;  3  Jolm  iii.  4.)  Every  such  peison  will 
always  come  to  Christ  and  embrace  His  Gospel  when  it  is 
brought  near  him.  He  will  have  an  honest  desire  that  "  hia 
deeds  may  be  made  manifest,"  and  that  his  real  character  may 
be  discovered  to  himself  and  others.  He  will  have  an  honest 
wish  to  know  whether  his  habits  of  life  are  really  godly,  or 
"  wrought  in  God." 

The  principle  here  laid  down  is  of  great  importance,  and  expe- 
rience shows  that  the  assertion  of  the  text  is  always  confirmed 
by  facts.  I  believe  there  was  not  a  truly  gpod  man  among  the 
Jews  in  our  Lord's  day,  who  did  not  at  once  receive  Christ,  and 
welcome  Christ's  Gospel,  as  soon  as  it  was  brought  before  him. 
Nathanael  was  an  example.  He  was  a  man  "■  Avho  did  truth  " 
under  the  obscure  light  of  the  law  of  Moses,  as  ministered  by 
Scribes  and  Pharisees.  But  the  moment  the  Messiah  was  brought 
before  him,  he  received  Him  and  believed. — So  also,  I  beheve, 
when  the  Gospel  comes  into  a  church,  a  parish,  or  a  congregation, 
it  is  always  gladly  received  and  embraced  by  any  whose  hearts 
are  true.  To  be  a  truly  godly  man,  anl  yet  to  refuse  to  come 
to  Christ,  is  an  impossibility.  He  that  hears  of  Christ  and  does 
not  come  to  Him,  and  believe  on  Him  as  God's  appointed  way 
of  salvation,  has  something  fatally  wrong  about  him.  He  is  not 
really  ''  doing  truth."  He  is  not  a  converted  man.  Gospel  light 
is  a  mighty  magnet.  If  there  is  any  one  that  has  true  religion 
within  its  sphere,  it  will  attract  to  itself  that  person.  To  be 
truly  religious  and  not  to  gravitate  towards  Him  who  is  the 
great  centre  of  all  light  and  truth,  is  impossible.  If  a  man  re- 
fuses Christ,  he  cannot  be  a  godly  man. 

The  application  of  the  two  last  verses  to  the  case  of  Nicodemus 
and  those  Jews  who  were  in  the  same  >tate  of  mind  as  Nicode- 
mus, is  plain  and  obvious.  Our  Lord  leaves  on  the  Pharisee's 
mir.d  a  solemn  and  heart-searching  conclusion.  "  Think  not 
that  you  can  stay  away  from  me  after  hearing  this  discourse  and 
be  saved.  If  you  are  a  really  earnest  inquirer  after  truth,  and 
your  heart  is  honest  and  sincere,  you  must  go  on,  you  must 
come  to  the  light  and  embrace  the  light,  and  you  will  do  so, 
however  great  your  present  ignorance.  If  on  the  other  hand 
you  are  not  really  desirous  to  serve  God,  you  will  piove  it  by 
keeping  away  from  my  Gospel,  and  by  not  confes.sing  me  as  the 
Messiah."  It  is  a  pleasant  reflection,  that  after  events  proved 
that  Nicodemus  was  one  who  "  did  truth."  He  used  the  light 
our  Lord  graciously  imparted  to  him.  He  came  forward  and 
spoke  for  Christ  in  the  council.     And  at  last,  when  he  boldly 


168  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTH. 

helped  to  bury  Christ,  he  made  it  manifest  to  all  Israel  that  "  his 
deeds  were  wroa-ht  in  God." 

Let  it  be  noted,  that  the  two  verses  which  conclude  our 
Lord's  address  to  Nicodemus  are  a  most  instructive  test  of  the 
sincer  ty  and  reality  of  persons  who  appear  anxious  inq[uirer3 
in  religion.  If  they  are  honest  and  true  they  will  go  on,  and 
come  to  the  full  light  of  Christ.  If  they  are  not  honest  and 
sincere,  but  only  influenced  by  temporary  excitement,  ihey  will 
probably  go  back  from  the  light,  and  will  certainly  not  close 
with  Christ  and  become  his  disciples.  This  should  be  pressed 
by  ministers  on  all  inquirers.  "  If  you  are  true  you  will  come 
to  the  light.  If  you  are  not  true,  you  will  go  back,  or  stand 
still ;  you  will  not  draw  near  and  close  with  Christ."  The  test 
will  never  be  found  to  fail.  Those  who  wish  to  see  how  ex- 
ceedingly weak  the  beginnings  of  grace  may  be  in  a  heart,  and 
yet  be  true,  as  it  proved  in  the  case  of  Nicodemus,  wiil  find  the 
matter  most  skilfully  treated  in  a  small  Avork  of  Perkins,  little 
known,  called  "A  Grain  of  Mustard  Seed."  A  man  may  have 
the  beginning  of  regeneration  in  his  heart,  and  yet  be  so  ignorant 
as  not  to  know  what  regeneration  is. 

In  concluding  these  long  notes,  for  the  length  of  which  the 
immense  importance  of  the  passage  must  be  my  apology,  I  think 
we  should  remark  that  we  never  hear  a  word  about  Nicodemus 
being  baptized !  This  fact  is  a  strong  incidental  evidence  to  my 
mind,  that  the  baptism  of  water  was  not  the  subject  which  our 
Lord  had  in  view  when  he  told  Nicodemus  that  he  must  be  1  orn 
of  water  and  the  Spirit. 

One  other  thing  ought  to  be  remarked,  in  leaving  this  subject 
of  ()ur  Lord's  conversation  with  Nicodemus.  That  thing  is  the 
singular  fulness  of  matter  by  wliich  the  whole  of  our  Lord's 
address  is  characterized.  Within  the  space  of  twenty  verses  we 
read  of  the  work  of  all  Three  Perspns  in  the  Trinity, — the 
Father's  love,  the  Son's  death  on  the  cross,  and  the  Spirit's 
operation  in  the  new  birth  of  man, — the  corruption  of  man's 
nature,  the  nature  of  regeneration,  and  the  efficacy  of  faith 
in  Christ, — the  way  to  escape  perishing  in  hell,  the  true  cause 
of  man's  condemnation  if  ^le  is  lost,  and  the  true  marks  of 
sincerity  in  an  inquirer.  A  fuller  sermon  was  never  del'vered 
than  that  which  was  here  preached  to  Nicodemus  in  one  even- 
ing I  There  is  hardly  a  single  important  point  in  divinity  which 
is  I'.ft  untouched  I 


JOHN,    CHAP.   III. 


169 


JOHN  III.  22—36. 


22  After  these  tliiDgs  came  Je- 
sus and  his  disciples  into  the  land 
of  Judsea;  and  there  he  tarried 
-with  them,  and  baptized. 

23  And  John  also  was  baptizing 
in  ^non  near  to  Salim,  because 
there  was  much  water  there:  and 
they  came,  and  were  baptized. 

24  For  John  was  not  yet  cast 
into  prison. 

25  Then  there  arose  a  question 
between  some  of  John's  disciples 
and  the  Jews  about  purifying. 

26  And  they  came  unto  John, 
and  said  unto  him,  Rabbi,  he  that 
was  with  thee  beyond  Jordan,  to 
whom  thou  barest  witness,  behold, 
the  same  baptizeth,  and  all  men 
come  to  him. 

27  John  answered  and  said,  A 
man  can  receive  notnmg,  except  it 
be  given  him  from  heaven. 

28  Ye  yourselves  bear  me  wit- 
ness, that  I  said,  I  am  not  the 
Christ,  but  that  I  am  sent  before 
him. 

29  He  that  hath  the  bride  is  the 
bridegroom :  but  the  friend  of  the 
bridegroom,   which    standeth    and 

On  oue  account,  this  passage  deserves  the  special  atten- 
tion of  all  devout  readers  of  the  Bible.  It  contains  the 
last  testimony  of  John  the  Baptist  concerning  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  That  faithful  man  of  God  was  the  same 
at  the  end  of  his  ministry  that  he  was  at  the  beginning 
— the  same  in  his  views  of  self, — the  same  in  his  views 
of  Christ.  Happy  is  that  church  whose  ministers  are  as 
steady,  bold,  and  constant  to  one  thing,  as  John  the 
Baptist ! 

We  have,  firstly,  in  these  verses,  a  humhUng  example  of 
the  petty  jealousies  and  party -spirit  which  may  exist  among 
professors  of  religion.  We  are  told,  that  the  disciples  of 
John  tbe  Baptist  were  offended,  because  the  ministry  of 

8 


heareth  him,  rejoiceth  greatly  be- 
cause of  the  bridegroom's  voice: 
this  my  joy  therefore  is  fulfilled. 

30  He  must  increase,  but  I  mvM 
decrease. 

31  He  that  cometh  from  above  i& 
above  all :  he  that  is  of  the  earth  is 
earthly,  and  speaketh  of  the  earth : 
he  that  cometh  from  heaven  is 
above  all. 

32  And  what  he  hath  seen  and 
heard,  that  he  testifieth;  and  no 
man  receiveth  his  testimony. 

33  He  that  hath  received  his  tes- 
timony hath  set  to  his  seal  that 
God  is  true. 

34  For  he  whom  God  hath  sent 
speaketh  the  words  of  God:  for  God 
giveth  not  the  Spirit  by  measure 
unto  him. 

35  The  Father  loveth  the  Son, 
and  hath  given  aU  things  into  his 
hand. 

36  He  that  beheveth  on  the  Son 
hath  everlasting  life :  and  he  that 
beheveth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see 
life ;  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth 
on  him. 


170  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Jesus  began  to  attract  more  attention  than  that  of  their 
master.  "  They  came  unto  John,  and  said  unto  him,  Rabbi, 
he  that  was  with  thee  beyond  Jordan,  to  whom  thou 
barest  witness,  behold  the  same  baptizeth,  and  all  men 
come  to  him." 

The  spirit  exhibited  in  this  complaint,  is  unhappily  too 
comn)on  in  the  Churches  of  Christ.  The  succession  of  these 
compl  liners  has  never  failed.  There  are  never  wanting 
religious  professors  who  care  far  more  for  the  increase  of 
their  own  party,  than  for  the  increase  of  true  Christianity; 
and  who  cannot  rejoice  in  the  spread  of  religion,  if  it 
spreads  anywhere  except  within  their  own  pale.  There  is 
a  generation  which  can  see  no  good  doing  except  in  the 
ranks  of  its  own  congregations ;  and  which  seems  ready 
to  shut  men  out  of  heaven,  if  they  will  not  enter  therein 
under  its  banner. 

The  true  Christian  must  watch  and  pray  against  the 
spirit  here  manifested  by  John's  disciples.  It  is  very 
insidious,  very  contagious,  and  very  injurious  to  the  cause 
of  religion.  Nothing  so  defiles  Christianity  and  gives  the 
enemies  of  truth  such  occasion  to  blaspheme,  as  jealousy 
and  party-spirit  among  Christians.  Wherever  there  is  real 
grace,  we  should  be  ready  and  willing  to  acknowledge  it, 
even  though  it  may  be  outside  our  own  pale.  We  should 
strive  to  say  with  the  apostle,  "  If  Christ  be  preached,  I 
rejoice,  yea!  and  will  rejoice."  (Phil.  i.  18.)  If  good  is 
done,  we  ought  to  be  thankful,  though  it  even  may  not  be 
done  in  what  we  think  the  best  way.  If  souls  are  saved, 
we  ought  to  be  glad,  whatever  be  the  means  that  God  may 
think  fit  to  employ. 

We  have,  secondly,  in  these  verses,  a  splendid  pattern 
of  true  and  godly  humility.  We  see  in  John  the  Baptist 
a  very  different  spirit  from  that  displayed  by  his  disciples. 
He  begins  by  laying  down  the  great  principle,  that  accep- 
tance with  man  is  a  special  gift  of  God ;  and  that  we  must 


JOHN,   CHAP.    III.  171 

therefore  not  presume  to  find  fault,  when  others  have  more 
acceptance  than  ourselves.  *'  A  man  can  receive  nothing 
except  it  be  given  him  from  heaven."  He  goes  on  to 
remind  his  followers  of  his  repeated  declaration,  that  one 
greater  than  himself  was  coming  ; — "  I  said,  I  am  not  the 
Christ."  He  tells  them  that  his  office  compared  to  that  of 
Christ,  is  that  of  the  bridegroom's  friend,  compared  to 
the  bridegroom.  And  finally,  he  solemnly  affirms,  that 
Christ  must  and  will  become  greater  and  greater,  and 
that  he  himself  must  become  less  and  less  important,  until, 
like  a  star  eclipsed  by  the  rising  sun,  he  has  completely 
disappeared. 

A  frame  of  mind  like  this,  is  the  highest  degree  of  grace 
to  which  mortal  man  can  attain.  The  greatest  saint  in  the 
sight  of  God,  is  the  man  who  is  most  thoroughly  *'  clothed 
with  humility."  (1  Peter  v.  5.)  Would  we  know  the 
prime  secret  of  being  men  of  the  stamp  of  Abraham,  and 
Moses,  and  Job,  and  David,  and  Daniel,  and  St.  Paul,  and 
John  the  Baptist  ?  They  were  all  eminently  humble  men. 
Living  at  different  ages,  and  enjoying  very  different  degrees 
of  light,  in  this  matter  at  least  they  were  all  agreed.  In 
themselves  they  saw  nothing  but  sin  and  weakness.  To 
God  they  gave  all  the  praise  of  what  they  were.  Let  ns 
walk  in  their  steps.  Let  us  covet  earnestly  the  best  gifts ; 
but  above  all,  let  us  covet  humility.  The  way  to  true 
honour  is  to  be  humble.  No  man  ever  was  so  praised  by 
Christ,  as  the  very  man  who  says  here,  "  I  must  decrease," 
the  humble  John  the  Baptist. 

We  have,  thirdly,  in  these  verses,  an  instructive  declara- 
tion of  Christ's  honour  and  dignity.  John  the  Baptist 
teaches  his  disciples  once  more,  the  true  greatness  of  the 
Person  whose  growing  popularity  offended  them.  Once 
more,  and  perhaps  for  the  last  time,  he  proclaims  Him  as 
one  worthy  of  all  honour  and  praise.  He  uses  one  striking 
expression  after  another,  to  convey  a  correct  idea  of  the 


172  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

majesty  of  Christ.  He  speaks  of  Him  as  '*  the  bride- 
groom" of  the  Church, — as  "  him  that  cometh  from  above," 
— as  "  him  whom  God  hath  sent," — as  "him  to  whom  the 
Spirit  is  given  without  measure," — as  Him  "  whom  the 
Father  loves,"  and  into  "  whose  hands  all  things  are 
given," — ^to  believe  in  whom  is  life  everlasting,  and  to 
reject  whom  is  eternal  ruin.  Each  of  these  phrases  is  full 
of  deep  meaning,  and  would  supply  matter  for  a  long  ser- 
mon. All  show  the  depth  and  height  of  John's  spiritual 
attainments.  More  honourable  things  are  nowhere  written 
concerning  Jesus,  than  these  verses  recorded  as  spoken  by 
John  the  Baptist. 

Let  us  endeavour  in  life  and  death,  to  hold  the  same 
views  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  to  which  John  here  gives  expres- 
sion. We  can  never  make  too  much  of  Christ.  Our 
thoughts  about  the  Church,  the  ministry,  and  the  sacra- 
ments, may  easily  become  too  high  and  extravagant.  We 
can  never  have  too  high  thoughts  about  Christ,  can  never 
love  Him  too  much,  trust  Him  too  implicitly,  lay  too  much 
weight  upon  Him,  and  speak  too  highly  in  His  praise.  He 
is  worthy  of  all  the  honour  that  we  can  give  Him.  He  will 
be  all  in  heaven.  Let  us  see  to  it,  that  He  is  all  in  our 
hearts  on  earth. 

We  have,  lastly,  in  these  verses,  a  broad  assertion  of  the 
nearness  and  presentness  of  the  salvation  of  true  Chris- 
tians. John  the  Baptist  declares,  "  He  that  believeth  on 
the  Son  hath  everlasting  life."  He  is  not  intended  to  look 
forward  with  a  sick  heart  to  a  far  distant  privilege.  He 
"  hath"  everlasting  life  as  soon  as  he  believes.  Pardon, 
peace,  and  a  complete  title  to  Heaven,  are  an  immediate 
possession.  They  become  a  believer's  own,  from  the  very 
moment  he  puts  faith  in  Christ.  They  will  not  be  more 
completely  his  own,  if  he  lives  to  the  age  of  Methuselah. 

The  truth  before  us,  is  one  of  the  most  glorious  privileges 
of  the  Gospel.     There  are  no  works  to  be  done,  no  condi- 


JOHN,    CHAP.    III.  173 

tions  to  be  fulfilled,  no  price  to  be  paid,  no  weaving  years 
of  probation  to  be  passed,  before  a  sinner  can  be  accepted 
with  God.  Let  him  only  believe  on  Christ,  and  he  is  at 
once  forgiven.  Salvation  is  close  to  the  chief  of  sinners. 
Let  him  only  repent  and  believe,  and  this  day  it  is  his 
own.  By  Christ  all  that  believe  are  at  once  justified  from 
all  things. 

Let  us  leave  the  whole  passage  with  one  grave  and 
heart-searching  thought.  If  faith  in  Christ  brings  with  it 
present  and  immediate  privileges,  to  remain  unbelieving  is 
to  be  in  a  state  of  tremendous  peril.  If  heaven  is  very 
near  to  the  believer,  hell  must  be  very  near  to  the  unbeliever. 
The  greater  the  mercy  that  the  Lord  Jesus  ofiers,  the 
greater  will  be  the  guilt  of  those  who  neglect  and  reject  it. 
"  He  that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life ;  but  the 
wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him." 

Notes.    John  IIL  22—36. 

22. — [Came  Jesus...mto...land  ofJudcea.]  Some  have  thought,  from 
this  expression,  that  the  conversation  between  Christ  and  Nico- 
demus  did  not  take  place  in  Jerusalem  or  Judaea,  but  in  Galilee. 
Others  have  thought  that  a  long  interval  must  be  supposed  to 
have  elapsed  betvv^een  the  conversation  and  the  events  wliich  are 
here  narrated. — I  can  agree  with  neither  view. — I  believe  the 
true  explanation  is,  that  "the  land"  here  spoken  of  means  the 
rural  part  or  territory  of  Judaea,  in  contradistinction  to  the 
capital  town  of  the  territory,  Jerusalem.  The  meaning  will  then 
be,  that  Jesus  left  the  city  and  went  into  the  country  districts. 
The  expression,  "  Thou  Bethlehem,  in  the  land  of  Judaea,"  is 
similar.  (Matt.  ii.  6.) 

[He  tarried.]  The  Greek  word  so  rendered  signifies  a  lengthened 
stay.  It  is  translated  in  other  places  "continued"  or  "abode." 
It  is  note-worthy  that  many  of  the  events  of  our  Lord's  ministry 
in  Jerusalem  and  the  surrounding  district,  are  evidently  not 
recorded  in  any  of  the  Gospels. 

[And  baptized.]  That  our  Lord  did  not  baptize  with  His  own 
hands,  but  left  the  ordinance  to  be  administered  by  His  disci[>les, 
as  work  inferior  to  that  of  preaching,  we  may  learn  firom  the 
next  chapter.  (John  iv.  2.) 

Lightfoot  c  bserves  that  "  The  administration  of  Christ's  ordi* 


174:  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

nar.ces  by  h's  ministers,  accordinj^  to  His  institution,  is  as  His 
own  work.     The  disciples'  baptizing  is  called  His  baptizing." 

The  questions  have  often  been  raised,  "In  what  name  was 
this  baptism  administered?"  "  Was  it  a  baptism  that  needed  tj 
be  repeated  after  the  day  of  Pentecost  ?" — The  most  probab'e 
answer  to  the  first  question  is,  that  it  was  a  baptism  in  the  name 
of  Jesus,  upon  profession  of  belief  that  he  was  the  Messiali. 
The  most  probable  answer  to  the  second  question  is,  that  it  was 
certainly  not  a  baptism  that  required  repetition.  To  suppose 
that  a  baptism,  administered  by  our  Lord's  disciples,  under  our 
Lord's  own  eye,  and  by  our  Lord's  own  command,  was  not  as 
effectual  and  profitable  an  ordinance  as  any  baptism  that  was 
ever  afterwards  administered,  is  a  most  improbable  supposition. 

It  may  be  remarked  here,  that  there  is  no  ground  for  the 
common  idea,  that  it  is  absolutely  necessary  that  baptism  should 
be  administered  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  in  order  to  be  a  valid 
and  Christian  baptism.  In  three  cases  recorded  in  the  Acts  we 
are  expressly  told  that  baptism  was  administered  in  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ,  and  no  mention  is  made  of  all  three  Persons  in  the 
Trinity.  (See  Acts  ii.  38;  viii.  37;  x.  48.)  In  all  these  cases, 
however,  it  will  be  remembered,  baptism  in  the  name  of  Christ 
was  practically  baptism  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity.  It  was  con- 
fession of  faith  in  Him  whom  the  Father  sent,  and  who  was  the 
giver  of  the  Holy  Q-host. 

As  a  general  rule  in  the  Church  of  Christ,  no  doubt,  baptism 
ought  to  be  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity.  (Matt,  xxviii.  19.)  But 
that  our  Lord's  disciples,  in  the  place  now  before  us,  did  not 
baptize  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity  is  pretty  certain,  and  that 
baptism  in  the  name  of  Jesus  is  vaHd  Christian  baptism  seems 
clear  from  the  places  referred  to  in  Acts. 

Hutcheson  remarks,  that  "  Christ's  own  bodily  presence,  filled 
with  the  Spirit  without  measure,  did  not  take  away  the  use  of 
external  ordinances,"  such  as  baptism.  The  Quaker's  opinion, 
that  we  need  no  external  ordinances  under  the  Gospel,  is  hard 
to  reconcile  with  such  a  text  as  this. 

23. — [John  also  was  baptizing.]  We  can  hardly  doubt  that  John 
baptized  all  who  came  to  him,  at  this  period  of  his  ministry,  in 
the  name  of  Jesus,  upon  confession  of  faith  that  Jesus  was  the 
Messiah.  It  seems  most  improbable  that  after  publicly  pointing 
out  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Lamb  of  God,  and  the  promised  Saviour, 
he  would  be  content  to  baptize  with  the  baptism  of  repentance, 
which  he  had  administered  before  Christ  appeared.  In  short, 
John's  baptism  at  tiiis  period,  and  the  baptism  administered  by 
Christ's  disciples,  must  have  been  precisely  the  same. 

I  may  remark  here,  that  the  opinion  maintained  by  Roman 


175 

Catholics,  and  those  who  agree  with  them,  that  there  was  an 
essential  diflference  between  John's  baptism  and  Christian  bap- 
tism, seems  to  me  entirely  destitute  of  foundation.  I  agree  A\ilh 
Brentius,  Lightfoot,  and  most  of  the  Protestant  commentators, 
that  John's  baptism  and  Christian  baptism  differed  only  in  cir- 
cumstantials, but  were  the  same  in  substance,  and  tliat  a  person 
baptized  by  John  the  Baptist  had  no  need  to  be  re  baptized  after 
the  day  of  Pentecost. — Unless  we  take  this  view,  I  cannot  see 
any  evidence  that  Peter,  and  Andrew,  and  James,  and  John 
ever  received  Christian  baptism  at  all.  There  is  not  a  single 
word  in  the  Grospel  to  show  that  they  were  ever  baptized  again 
after  leaving  John  the  Baptist's  company,  and  becoming  Chris' 'a 
disciples.  Moreover,  we  are  expressly  told  that  "  Jesus  himself 
baptized  not."  (John  iv.  2.)  The  only  baptism  that  the  first 
apostles  received  appears  to  have  been  John  the  Baptist's  bap- 
tism. This  fact  seems  to  me  to  prove  irresistibly,  that  John's 
baptism  was  essentially  of  equal  value  with  Christian  baptism, 
and  that  a  person  baptized  by  John  had  no  need  to  be  baptized 
again. 

The  well-known  passage  in  Acts,  (Acts  xix.  1 — 6,)  which  is 
always  quoted  in  opposition  to  the  view  I  maintain,  does  not 
appear  to  me  at  all  conclusive  and  decisive  upon  the  question 
now  before  us. — For  one  thing,  the  persons  described  in  that 
passage  as  having  only  been  baptized  with  John's  baptism,  seem 
to  have  been  ignorant  of  the  first  principles  of  Christianity. 
They  said,  "we  have  not  so  much  as  heard  whether  there  be 
any  Holy  Ghost."  That  expression  shows  pretty  clearly  that 
they  had  not  been  hearers  of  John  the  Baptist,  who  frequently 
spoke  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  (Matt.  iii.  11,)  and  had  not  been 
baptized  by  John  himself — It  is  most  probable  that  they  were 
inhabitants  of  Ephesus,  who  had  only  heard  Apollos  preaching, 
and  knew  even  less  than  their  teacher.  Whether  St.  Paul  might 
not  think  it  needful  to  administer  baptism  to  such  ignorant 
disciples  as  these,  who  could  give  no  intelligent  account  of  Chris- 
tianity, is  a  question  I  would  not  undertake  to  decide. — But 
beside  this,  it  is  by  no  means  certain  that  these  disciples  were 
really  baptized  again  with  water  at  all.  Brentius  holds  that  the 
words,  "they  were  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus," 
mean  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit.  Streso  maintains  that  the  words 
are  the  concluding  sentence  of  St.  Paul's  address  to  these  ignorant 
men.  I  cannot  say  that  either  of  these  last  views  is  altogether 
satisfactory.  All  I  say  is,  that  I  would  infinitely  rather  adopt 
either  of  them,  than  hold  such  a  monstrous  opinion  as  the  Romish 
one,  that  John's  baptism  was  not  Christian  baptism  at  all,  and 
needed  to  be  repeated.  The  difficulties  in  the  way  of  this  last 
view  appear  to  me  far  greater  than  the  difl&culties  in  the  way  of 
the  one  which  I  support.  To  say  that  the  first  five  apostles  never 
received  any  Christian  baptism  at  all  is  really  preposterous.     To 


176  EXPOSITORY   ^fTOUGHTL 

assert  that  Christ  Himself  baptized  them  is  tc  ct^bert  what  tht 
Bible  never  even  hints  at.  There  is  not  a  shadow  of  proof  that 
Jesus  ever  baptized  a  single  person.  I  see  no  escape  from  the 
conclusion  that  Andrew,  John,  Peter,  Philip,  and  Nathanael 
either  received  John's  baptism  or  no  baptism  at  all. 

Whatever  men  may  think  about  John's  baptism  before  the 
time  when  our  Lord  appeared,  they  will  never  prove  that  the 
baptism  he  administered  in  the  text  before  us  was  not  Christian 
baptism.  To  suppose  that  John  would  go  on  administering  an 
ordinance  which  he  knew  was  imperfect,  while  Christian  baptism 
was  being  administered  by  Christ's  disciples  a  few  miles  off,  is 
simply  absurd. 

l^non  near  to  Salim.]  It  is  not  certainly  known  where  this 
place  was.  The  probability  is  that  it  was  somewhere  in  Judaea. 
In  the  list  of  the  cities  given  to  the  tribe  of  Juda,  we  find 
together  "  Shilhim  and  Ain."  (Josh.  xv.  32.)  It  is  very  possible 
that  these  two  may  be  the  ''^non  and  Salim"  now  before  us. 
The  changes  which  proper  names  undergo  in  passing  from  one 
language  to  another,  every  one  knows,  are  very  great. 

[Because  there  was  much  wateri]  It  is  frequently  assumed  from 
this  expression,  that  John's  baptism  was  immersion  and  not 
sprinkling,  and  that  on  this  account  a  great  supply  of  water  was 
absolutely  needful.  It  may  perhaps  have  been  so.  The  point  is 
one  of  no  importance.  That  immersion,  however,  is  necessary  to 
the  validity  of  baptism,  and  that  sprinkling  alone  is  not  sufficient, 
are  points  that  can  never  be  demonstrated  from  Scripture.  So 
long  as  water  is  used,  it  seems  to  be  left  a  matter  of  indifference 
whether  the  person  baptized  is  dipped  or  sprinkled.  I  should 
find  it  very  hard  to  believe  that  the  three  thou?and  baptized  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost,  or  the  jailor  and  his  family,  bapiized  at 
midnight  in  the  Phihppian  prison,  were  all  immersed.  The 
Church  of  England  wisely  allows  either  mode  of  applying  wa  er 
to  be  used.  To  suppose  that  dipping  is  forbidden  to  English 
Churchmen  is  mere  ignorance. 

[They  came...l)aptized.]  This  is  an  elliptical  sentence.  "We  are 
not  told  who  are  meant  by  "  they."  It  is  like  "  men,"  in  Matt. 
V.  15,  and  means  generally  "  people." 

24..— [John... not  yet. .prison^  John's  diUgence  in  his  Master's 
work  is  here  pointed  out.  He  doubtless  knew  that  his  ministry 
was  fulfilled  when  Christ  appeared,  and  that  the  time  of  his  own 
departure,  and  violent  death  under  Herod's  hands,  was  at  hand. 
Yet  he  worked  on  to  the  very  last.  "Blessed  is  that  servant, 
whom  his  Lord  when  he  cometh  shall  find  so  doing."  (Matt 
xxiv.  46.) 

Tlieophylact  thinks  that  John's  early  death  was  permitted  la 


177 

God's  providence,  in  order  to  prevent  any  distraction  in  people's 
minds  between  him  and  Christ. 

25. — [There  arose.. .quefition... disciples. ..Jews.. .purifying.']  The  nature 
and  partimlnrs  of  this  dispute  must  be  left  to  conjecture.  We 
can  only  form  an  idea  of  it  from  the  context.  It  seems  proba- 
ble that  it  was  a  dispute  between  the  unbelieving  Jews  and  the 
disciples  of  John  the  Baptist,  about  the  comparative  value  of 
the  two  baptisms  which  were  being  administered  in  Judea,  viz., 
John's  baptism  and  Christ's. — Which  was  the  most  puiifying? 
Which  was  the  most  efficacious?  Which  was  the  most  valuable 
of  the  two? — The  Jews  probably  taunted  John's  disciples  wiih 
the  dechne  of  their  master's  popularity.  John's  disciple^,  in 
ignorant  zeal  and  heat  for  their  master,  probably  contended  that 
no  new  teacher's  baptism  could  possibly  be  more  purifying  and 
valuable  than  their  own  master's. 

Wordsworth  remarks  upon  the  word  ''  purifying,"  that  St.  John 
never  uses  the  word  "  baptism,"  and  never  calls  John  the  Baptist 
by  his  common  surname  "  the  Baptist."  He  says  "  John  was  no 
longer  the  Baptist,  when  St.  John  wrote.  His  baptism  had 
passed  away." 

Musculus,  on  this  verse,  observes  the  excessive  readiness  of 
men  in  every  age  to  raise  questions,  controversies,  and  persecu- 
tions about  ceremonies  of  merely  human  institution,  while  about 
faith,  and  hope,  and  love,  and  humility,  and  patience,  and  mor- 
tification of  the  flesh,  and  renewal  of  the  Spirit,  they  exhibit  no 
zeal  at  all. 

Controversies  about  baptism  certainly  appear  to  be  among  the 
oldest  and  most  mischievous  by  which  the  Church  has  been 
plagued. 

26. — [They  came  unto  JoJin^  &cl]  The  language  of  the  whole  verse 
seems  intended  to  show  that  John's  disciples  were  jealous  for 
their  master's  ministry,  and  that  its  declining  popularity,  in  con- 
sequence of  our  Lord's  appearance  in  Judsea  as  a  public  teacher, 
was  a  cause  of  annoyance  to  them.  The  ver^e  is  an  instructive 
instance  of  that  littleness  and  party  spirit  which  are  ?o  painfully 
common  among  Christians  when  one  minister's  popularity  is 
interfered  with  by  the  appearance  of  another. 

[He.  ..u-ith  thee.. ..thou  harest  witness.]  This  expression  shows 
the  publicity  and  notoriety  of  John's  testimony  to  our  Lord  as 
the  Messiah  and  the  Lamb  of  God.  It  was  testimony  not  borne 
privately  in  a  corner,  but  in  the  hearing  and  full  knowledge  of 
all  John's  disciples.  It  would  seem  to  have  had  very  little  effect 
on  their  minds.  The  words  fell  on  their  ears,  but  went  no 
further. 

[Behold  the  same  baptizeth.]     This  expression  implies  partly 


178  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

surpiise  and  partly  complaint.  In  any  case  it  show^s  how  little 
the  balk  of  John's  disciples  understood  that  Jesus  was  really  the 
Messiah  promised  in  the  prophecies.  If  they  hid  und-rstoo  1  it, 
they  would  surely  neither  have  been  surprised  nor  annoyed  at 
Him  for  baptizing  and  becoming  popular.  They  would  rather 
have  expected  it  and  rejoiced  at  it.  It  is  one  among  many 
proofs  that  ministers  may  be  loved  by  their  hearers,  and  may 
tell  them  the  truth  faithfully,  and  yet  be  utterly  unable  to  make 
their  hearers  undei  stand  or  believe.  Few  are  like  Andrew,  and 
"follow  Jesus,"  when  their  minister  says,  "Behold  the  Lamb." 
The  most  are  as  though  they  did  not  hear  at  all. 

[All  men  come  to  him.]  These  words  must  doubtless  be  taken 
with  qualification.  The  expression,  "al  men,"  only  means, 
"  many  persons."  We  know  as  a  fact  that  not  all  men  came  to 
Christ.  Moreover,  we  must  remember,  that  out  of  those  who 
did  come  to  Christ,  very  few  believed.  John  says  in  his  reply 
to  his  disciples,  "No  man  receiveth  his  testimony." — Allowance 
must  be  made  for  the  irritation  under  which  John's  disciples 
spoke.  When  men  are  vexed  in  spirit,  by  seeing  their  own 
party  diminishing,  they  are  often  tempted  to  use  exaggerated 
and  incorrect  expressions. 

Hutcheson  remarks  on  this  verse,  that  "  Carnal  emulation  is 
an  old  and  great  sin  in  the  Church,  and  even  among  professors; 
it  being  the  foul  fruit  of  a  carnal  temper  to  look  on  the  success 
of  one  man's  gifts  as  the  debasing  of  another's  who  is  faithful, 
and  to  count  the  thriving  of  G-od's  work  in  one  minister's  hand 
the  disgracing  of  another  who  is  not  so  much  flocked  to." 

Cyril  remarks  on  this  verse,  how  admirably  God  can  bring 
good  out  of  apparent  evil.  Here,  as  in  many  cases,  a  carnal  and 
unkind  saying  of  John's  disciples  gives  occasion  to  John's  ad- 
mirable testimony  about  Christ. 

27. — [John  answered.. ..a  man  can  receive  nothing,  &c.]  This  sentence 
is  the  statement  of  a  general  truth  in  religion.  Success,  promo- 
tion, and  growth  of  influence  are  gifts  which  God  keeps  entirely 
in  His  own  hands.  If  one  faithful  minister's  popularity  wanes, 
while  another's  popularity  and  influence  over  men's  hearts  in- 
crease, the  thing  is  of  God,  and  we  must  submit  to  His  appoint- 
ment. (Psalm  Ixxv.  6.) 

The  application  of  the  sentence  is  not  to  Christ,  as  Chrysostom 
thought,  but  to  John  the  Baptist  himself,  as  Augustine  thought. 
They  are  meant  to  imply,  "  I  cannot  command  continued  success 
in  my  ministry.  I  can  only  receive  what  God  gives  me.  If  He 
thinks  fit  to  give  any  one  more  acceptance  with  men  than  myself, 
I  cannot  prevent  it,  and  have  no  right  to  complain.  All  success 
is  of  God.  All  that  I  have  had,  at  any  period  of  my  ministry, 
has  been  received,  and  none  deserved." — To  apply  the  sentence 


179 

to  our  Lord,  seems  to  me  an  unsatisfactory  iaterpreta'ioa,  and 
derogatory  to  the  dignity  of  Christ's  minis'ry.  Those  who  take 
this  view,  would  probably  prefer  the  marginal  reading  of  the 
word  "receive,"  and  would  render  it,  "No  man  can  take  to 
himself  anything."  The  sentence  would  then  be  like  St,  Paul's 
words  to  the  Hebrews,  "  No  man  taketh  this  honour  unro  him- 
self, but  he  that  is  called  of  God,  as  was  Aaron."  (Heb.  v.  4.) 
But  the  translation,  "  receive,"  and  the  application  to  John  the 
Baptist,  appear  to  me  more  agreeable  to  the  context,  and  the 
general  spirit  of  John's  reply.  And  although  the  word,  a  "  man," 
ought  not  to  have  much  s:ress  laid  upon  it,  I  cannot  help  think- 
ing that  John  uses  it  intentionally,  in  order  to  point  to  himself. 
"A  mere  man  like  me  can  receive  nothing  but  what  is  given  him 
from  heaven." 

Lightfoot  thinks  that  the  Greek  word  rendered  "  receive " 
means  "  perceive,"  or  "apprehend,"  and  that  John  meant,  "  I  see 
by  this  instance  of  yourselves,  that  no  man  can  learn  or  under- 
stand anything,  unless  it  be  given  him  from  heaven."  He 
re'jards  the  sentence  as  John's  rebuke  to  his  disciples  for  incre- 
dulity and  stupidity.  I  doubt  myself  whether  the  Greek  word 
will  bear  the  sense  Lightfoot  would  put  on  it. 

The  expression  "  from  heaven,"  is  equivalent  to  saying  "  from 
God."     See  Dan.  iv.  26;  Luke  xv.  21. 

The  whole  verse  is  a  most  useful  antidote  to  that  jealousy 
which  sometimes  springs  up  in  a  minister's  mind,  when  he  sees 
a  brother's  ministry  prospering  more  than  his  own. 

28, — [le  yourselves  hear  me  witness^....!  said,  c&c]  John  here  re- 
minds his  disciples  that  he  had  repeatedly  told  them  that  he 
was  not  the  Christ,  and  that  he  was  only  a  forerunner  sent 
before  Him.  They  ought  to  have  remembered  this.  If  they  had 
done  so,  they  would  not  have  been  surprised  at  the  rise  and  pro- 
gress  of  Christ's  ministry,  but  would  rather  have  expected  Him 
10  outshine  and  surpass  their  master,  as  a  matter  of  course. 

The  verse  is  an  instructive  illustration  of  the  forgetfulness  of 
heareis.  John's  testimony  to  the  dignity  of  Christ  and  His 
superiority  to  himself  had  been  constantly  repeated.  But  it  had 
been  all  thrown  away  on  his  disciples,  and  when  Christ  began  to 
receive  greater  honours  than  their  master,  and  their  own  party 
began  to  grow  smaller  than  that  of  Christ's  disciples,  they  were 
offended.     People  soon  forget  what  they  do  not  like. 

29. — [^He  that  hath....bride....hridegroom,  (fee]  In  this  verse  John  the 
Baptist  explains  the  relative  positions  occupied  by  himself  and 
Christ  by  a  famihar  illustration.  In  tracing  it  out,  it  is  of  great 
importance  not  to  press  the  points  of  resemblance  too  far.    Tho 


180  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

illustration  is  one  which  specially  requires  to  be  handled  wilti 
reverence,  decency,  and  discretion. 

The  "bride,"  in  the  ver^e,  signifies  the  whole  company  of 
believers,  the  Lamb's  wile.  (Rev.  xxi.  9.)  The  "  bridegroom  "  ia 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  Himself.  The  "friend  of  the  bridegroom'' 
means  John  the  Baptist,  and  all  other  faithful  ministers  of  Christ. 
According  to  the  marriage-customs  of  the  Jews,  there  were  cer- 
tain persons  called  the  bridegroom's /rienc^s,  who  were  the  means 
of  communication  between  him  and  the  bride  before  the  mar- 
riage. Their  duty  was  simply  to  set  forwatd  and  promote  the 
bridegroom's  interests,  and  to  remove  all  obstacles,  as  far  as  pos- 
sible, to  a  speedy  union  of  the  parties.  To  accomplish  this  end 
and  promote  a  thoroughly  good  understanding  between  the 
bride  an  I  brid  groom  was  their  sole  office.  If  they  saw  the 
bridegroom's  suit  prospering,  and  at  last  saw  him  received 
favourably  and  gladly  by  the  bride,  their  end  was  accomplished 
and  their  work  was  done.  To  all  this  John  the  Baptist  makes 
allusion  in  the  verse  now  before  us.  He  tells  his  disciples  that 
his  sole  work  was  to  set  forward  and  promote  a  good  under- 
standing between  Christ  and  men.  If  he  saw  that  work  pros- 
periiig  he  was  thankful  and  would  rejoice,  even  though  the  result 
was  that  his  own  personal  importance  was  diminished.  He 
would  have  his  disciples  know  that  the  growing  popularity  of 
Christ  which  oflfended  them,  was  the  very  thing  which  he  longed 
to  see.  He  had  no  greater  joy  than  to  hear  of  the  voice  of  Christ, 
the  bridegroom,  being  listened  to  by  believers,  the  bride.  It  was 
the  very  thing  for  which  he  had  been  preaching  and  ministering, 
His  "  joy  was  fulfilled." 

The  word  "  hath  "  means  "  possesses  as  his  own."  Possession 
of  the  bride,  as  "  bone  of  his  bones  and  flesh  of  his  flesh,"  is  the 
peculiar  prerogative  of  the  bridegroom.  (Gen.  ii.  23.)  With  this 
his  friends  have  nothing  to  do. 

The  expression  "  standeth,"  must  probably  not  be  pressed  too 
far.  •  Some  think  that  it  is  taken  from  the  position  occupied  by 
the  bridegroom's  friends  on  the  day  when  the  bridegroom  was 
first  formally  introduced  to  the  bride.  They  stood  at  a  respect- 
ful distance  and  looked  on.  The  expression  certainly  implies 
inferiority.  St.  Paul  says  that  the  Jewish  priests  ^^ stand"  daily 
ministering,  but  Christ  ^'sat  down"  on  the  right  hand  of  God. 
(Heb.  X.  12.) 

The  expression  *'  heareth  the  bridegroom's  voice,"  like  the  last, 
is  one  that  must  not  be  pressed  too  far.  It  is  a  part  of  the 
drapery  of  the  illustration.  When  report  was  brought  to  John 
the  Baptist,  that  Jesus  Christ's  ministry  was  accepted  by  some, 
and  that  He  found  favour  with  many  disciples,  then  was  fulfilled 
what  is  here  miant.     John  ''heard  the  bridegroom's  voice,"  and 


JOHN,   CHAP.   III.  181 

saw  the  successful  progress  of  his  mission,  and  seeing  and  hear- 
ing this  "rejoiced." 

The  whole  verse  is  a  most  instructive  picture  of  a  true  minis- 
ter's work  and  character.  He  is  a  friend  of  Christ,  and  is  ordained 
in  order  to  promote  a  union  between  Christ  and  souls.  (2  Cor.  ii. 
2.)  He  must  rigidly  adhere  to  that  office,  and  must  never  take 
to  himself  that  which  does  not  belong  to  him.  The  minister  who 
allows  honour  to  be  given  to  himself  which  only  belongs  to  Jesus, 
and  exalts  his  own  office  into  that  of  a  mediator  and  priest,  is 
treacherously  usurping  a  position  which  is  not  his  but  his  Mas- 
ter's. The  professing  Christian  who  treats  ministers  as  if  they 
were  priests  and  mediators,  is  dishonouring  Jesus  Christ,  and 
basely  giving  that  honour  to  the  Bridegroom's  friends  which 
belongs  exclusively  to  the  Bridegroom  Himself. 

The  expression  "  this  my  joy  is  fulfilled,"  is  a  very  instructive 
one  for  ministers.  It  shows  that  the  truest  happiness  of  a  minis- 
ter should  consist  in  Christ's  voice  being  heard  by  souls.  "  Now 
we  live,"  says  St.  Paul,  "  if  ye  stand  fast  in  the  Lord."  (1  Thess. 
iii.  8,)  &c. 

It  deserves  notice  that  when  our  Lord  at  another  period  of  His 
ministry  expressly  speaks  of  Himself  as  "  the  bridegroom,"  in 
His  reply  to  the  disciples  of  John  the  Baptist  (Matt.  ix.  15),  He 
seems  purposely  to  remind  them  of  tbeir  master's  words. 

Musculus,  on  this  verse,  observes,  "  The  day  of  the  Lord  will 
declare  what  kind  of  zeal  that  is  in  our  Popish  bishops,  who 
profess  to  be  influenced  by  zeal  for  the  love  of  the  church,  which 
is  Christ's  bride,  against  Christ's  enemies.  The  day  will  declare 
whether  a  zeal  which  makes  them  shed  innocent  blood  and  per- 
secute the  members  of  Christ,  is  the  zeal  of  true  friends  of  the 
Bridegroom,  or  of  treacherous  suitors  of  the  bride." 

30. — [He  must  increase...!.. .decrease.]  In  this  sentence  John  the 
Baptist  tells  his  complaining  disciples  that  it  is  right  and  proper 
and  necessary  that  Christ  should  grow  in  dignity,  and  that  he 
himself  should  be  less  thought  of.  He  was  only  the  servant ; 
Christ  was  the  Master.  He  was  only  the  forerunner  and  am- 
bassador, Christ  was  the  King.  He  was  only  the  morning  star; 
Christ  was  the  Sun.  The  idea  implied  appears  to  be  that  of  the 
stars  gradually  fading  away,  as  the  sun  rises,  after  the  break  of 
day.  The  stars  do  not  really  perish  or  really  become  less,  bat 
they  pale  and  become  invisible  before  the  superior  brightness  of 
the  great  centre  of  light.  The  sun  does  not  really  become 
larger,  or  really  increase  in  brightness,  but  it  becomes  more  fully 
visible,  and  occupies  a  position  in  which  it  more  completely  fills 
our  vision.  So  was  it  with  John  the  Baptist  and  Christ. — Every 
faithful  minister  ought  to  be  like-minded  with  John.  He  must 
be  content  to  be  less  thought  of  by  his  beheving  hearers,  in  pro* 


182  EXPOSITOKY  THOUGHTS, 

portion  as  they  grow  in  knowledge  and  faith,  and  se(  Christ  Him- 
self more  clearly.  As  churches  decay  and  fall  awaj ,  they  think 
less  of  Christ  and  more  of  their  ministers.  As  churches  revive 
and  receive  spiritual  life,  they  think  less  of  ministers  and  more  of 
Christ.  To  a  decaying  church  the  sun  is  going  down,  and  the 
stars  are  beginning  to  appear.  To  a  reviving  church  the  stars 
are  waning,  and  the  sun  appearing. 

31. — [IIe...cometh...ahove... above  021.1  -^"^  ^^^^  sentence  John  Ihe 
Baptist  asserts  the  infinite  superiority  of  Christ  over  himself  oi 
any  other  child  of  Adam,  whatever  office  he  may  fill.  Christ  is 
"  from  above."  He  is  not  merely  man,  but  Cod.  He  came  from 
heaven  when  He  took  our  nature  on  Him,  and  was  born.  As  God, 
He  is  as  far  above  all  His  ministers  and  servants  as  the  Creator 
is  above  the  creature.  He  is  "  far  above  all  principality,  and 
power,  and  every  name  that  can  be  named."  He  is  "  Head  over 
ail  things  to  the  church,"  and  richly  deserves  all  the  honour,  and 
dignity,  and  respect,  and  reverence  that  man  can  give.  (Ephes. 
i.  21,  22.) 

[He  that  is  of  the  earth... earthly. ..speaketh...earth.]  In  this  sen- 
tence John  the  Baptist  expresses  in  strong  language  the  compara- 
tive inferiority  to  Christ  of  himself  or  of  any  other  minister. 
"  All  who  like  me,"  he  seems  to  say,  "  are  only  men,  mere  dust 
and  clay,  descended  from  a  father  who  was  made  out  of  the  dust 
of  the  ground^  are  comparatively  earthly.  The  weakness  and 
feebleness  of  our  origin  pervade  all  our  doings.  By  nature 
eaj-thly,  our  works  are  earthly,  and  our  speaking  and  preaching 
earthly." — In  short,  there  will  be  a  savour  of  humanity  about  the 
ministry  of  every  one  who  is  naturally  engendered  of  the  seed 
of  Adam. 

The  difficulty  that  some  see  in  John  the  Baptist  calling  his  own 
ministry  "  earthly,"  is  quite  needlessly  raised.  It  is  evident  that 
he  calls  it  so  "  comparatively."  Compared  to  the  teaching  of 
Scribes  and  Pharisees  it  was  not  earthly  but  heavenly.  Com- 
pared to  the  teaching  of  Him  who  came  from  heaven  it  was 
earthly.  A  candle  compared  to  darkness  is  light.  But  the  same 
candle  compared  to  the  sun  is  a  poor  dim  spark. 

[He  that  cometh. ..heaven. ..above  aV.'\  Tliis  sentence  is  only  a 
repetition  of  the  beginning  of  the  verse.  It  is  a  second  assertion 
of  Christ's  greatness  and  superiority  over  any  mere  man,  in  order 
to  impress  the  matter  more  deeply  on  those  who  heard  it. 
"  Mark  what  I  tell  you,"  John  the  Baptist  seems  to  say  to  his 
disciples,  "I  repeat  emphatically  that  Christ  having  come  from 
heaven,  and  being  by  nature  God  as  well  as  man,  is  far  above  me 
and  all  othei-  ministers,  who  are  only  men  and  nothing  more." 

Some  think,  as  Erasmus,  Bengel,  Wetstein,  Olshausen,  and 
Tholuck,  that  John  the  Baptist's  words  end  with  the  verse  pre- 


JOHN,    CHAP.   TIL  183 

ceding  the  one  now  before  us,  and  that  the  words  "He  that 
Cometh  from  above"  begin  the  comment  of  John  toe  EvangeHst. 
I  cannot  for  a  moment  admit  this  idea  to  be  correct.  I  see  no 
necessity  for  it.  The  whole  passage  runs  on  naturally,  a.^  the 
language  of  John  the  Baptist,  to  the  end  of  the  chapter,  i  see 
nothing  unsuitable  to  John  the  Baptist  in  the  concluding  verses. 
They  contain  no  truth  which  he  was  not  likely  to  know.  I  sec 
nothing  gained  by  this  idea.  It  throws  no  new  light  on  the 
passage,  and  is  an  awkward  break  which  would  never  occur  to 
a  simple  reader  of  the  Bible. 

32. — [W}iat...seen..Jieard...testiJiefh.'\  In  this  sentence  John  the 
Baptist  shows  the  divinity  of  Christ,  and  His  consequent  superi- 
ority over  himself  in  another  point  of  view.  He  says  that  Christ 
bears  witness  to  truths  which  he  has  "  seen  and  heard."  He  ia 
not  like  mere  human  ministers  who  only  declare  what  they  have 
been  taught  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  inspired  to  communicate  to 
others.  As  G-od,  He  declares  with  authority  truths  which  Ho 
had  seen,  and  heard,  and  known  from  all  eternity  with  the  Father. 
(John  7.  19,  30 ;  viii.  38.) 

Some  draw  a  distinction  between  what  our  Lord  has  seen  ana 
what  He  has  heard.  They  think  that  what  Christ  has  "  seen,' 
means  what  He  has  seen  as  one  with  Grod  the  Father  in  essence, 
and  what  Christ  has  "  heaid,"  means  what  He  has  heard  as  a 
distinct  person  in  the  Trinity. — Or  else  they  think  that  what 
Christ  has  "  seen,"  means  what  He  has  seen  with  the  Father  as 
Grod,  and  what  He  has  "  heard,"  what  He  has  heard  from  the 
Father  as  man. — I  doubt  the  correctness  of  either  view.  I  think 
it  more  probable  that  the  expression  ''  seen  and  heard,"  is  only  a 
proverbial  way  of  signifying  perfect  knowledge,  such  as  a  person 
has  intuitively  or  at  first  hand. 

Euthymius  thinks,  that  the  expression  "  seen  and  heard,"  was 
purposely  used,  because  of  the  weakness  of  John's  hearers ;  and 
that  such  expressions  were  necessar}',  in  order  to  give  such  hear- 
ers any  adequate  idea  of  Christ's  divine  nature. 

The  word  "  testifieth  "  deserves  notice,  as  an  expression  pecu- 
liarly characteristic  of  Christ's  ministry.  He  told  Pilate,  "I 
came  into  the  world  that  I  should  bear  witness  unto  the  truth." 
(John  xviii.  27.) 

\And  no  man  receiveth  his  testimony.]  The  expression  "no 
man  "  in  this  sentence,  must  evidently,  from  the  following  verses, 
be  taken  with  qualification.  It  must  mean  "  very  few."  Andrew, 
Peter,  Philip,  and  others,  had  received  Christ's  testimony.  The 
sentence  seems  intended  to  rebuke  the  complaint  uttered  by 
John's  disciples,  "  All  men  come  unto  him."  John  seems  to  say, 
"  However  many  persons  come  to  hear  Je3us,  you  will  yet  see 


184  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

that  very  few  believe  on  him.  Great  as  he  is,  and  deserving  c/f 
far  more  reverence  than  myself,  you  have  yet  to  learn,  that  e\ei 
he  is  really  beheved  on  by  few'.  The  crowds  who  follow  him  are. 
unhappily,  not  true  believers.  The  temporary  popularity  Avhich 
attends  his  ministry,  is  as  worthless  as  that  which  attended  my 
own." 

Pearce  thinks,  that  the  Greek  word  rendered  "and,"  would 
have  been  better  translated,  "  and  yet,"  as  in  John  vii.  19,  and 
ix.  30. 

The  notion  of  Augustine's,  that  "no  man,"  in  this  sentence 
means,  "  none  of  the  wicked,"  seems  very  untenable  and  unsa- 
tisfactory. 

33. — [He  hath  received,  &c.'\  In  this  verse  John  shows  the  great 
importance  of  receiving  Christ's  testimony.  So  far  from  being 
offended  by  the  crowd  which  attended  Christ's  ministry.  John's 
disciples  should  be  thankful  that  so  many  heard  Him,  and  that 
Bome  few  received  His  teaching  into  their  hearts. 

[Hath  set  to  his  seal.']  This  expression  is  peculiar,  and  found 
nowhere  else  in  the  New  Testament,  in  the  same  sense.  Of 
course  it  does  not  mean  any  literal  sealing.  It  only  means, 
''hath  formally  declared  his  belief, — hath  publicly  professed  his 
conviction," — just  as  a  man  puts  his  seal  to  a  document,  as  a  testi- 
mony that  he  consents  to  its  contents.  In  ancient  days,  when 
few  comparatively  could  w^rite,  to  afl&x  a  seal  to  a  paper,  was  a 
more  common  mode  of  expressing  assent  to  it,  than  to  sign  a 
name. — The  sentence  is  equivalent  to  saying,  "  He  that  receives 
Christ's  testimony,  has  set  down  his  name  as  one  who  beUeves 
that  God  is  true." 

[That  Ood  is  true.]  These  words  may  be  taken  two  ways. 
According  to  some  they  mean,  "He  that  receives  Christ,  declares 
his  belief,  that  it  is  the  true  God  who  has  sent  Christ ;  and  that 
Christ  is  no  impostor,  but  the  Messiah,  whom  the  true  God  of 
the  Old  Testament  prophets  promised  to  send." — According  to 
others  they  mean,  "  He  that  receives  Christ,  declares  his  belief, 
that  God  is  true  to  his  word,  and  has  kept  the  promise  that  he 
made  to  Adam,  Abraham,  and  David."  That  the  Greek  word 
rendered  "  true,"  will  bear  this  last  meaning,  seems  proved  by 
the  expression,  "  Let  God  be  true,  but  every  man  a  liar."  (Rom. 
iii.  4.)  Either  view  makes  good  sense  and  good  divinity ;  but 
on  the  whole,  I  prefer  the  second  one.  It  seems  to  me  strongly 
confirmed  by  the  expression  in  St.  John's  1st  Epistle:  "He  that 
believeth  not  God  hath  made  him  a  liar;  because  he  believetb 
not  the  record  that  Ged  gave  of  his  Son."  (1  John  v.  10.) 

Some  have  thought  that  the  sentence  may  mean,  "He  that 
receives  Christ,  declares  his  belief,  that  Christ  is  the  true  God." 


185 

ai.d  tliat  it  is  parallel  to  1  John  v.  20,  "  This  is  the  true  God/' — 
But  I  do  not- think  the  Greek  words  will  admit  of  the  interpre- 
tation. If  they  would,  the  Greek  fathers  would  never  have 
overlooked  this  text  in  writing  against  the  Arians.  Maldonatus 
seems  to  favour  this  opinion,  and  says  that  Cyril  holds  it.  But 
it  certainly  does  not  clearly  appear  in  Cyril's  commentary  on  the 
place. 

Si. — [He  ivhom  God  hath  sent]  In  this  verse  John  the  Baptist 
shows  the  dignity  of  Christ,  and  His  superiority  over  all  other 
teachers,  by  another  striking  declaration  about  Him.  He  begins 
by  giving  Him  the  well-known  epithet  which  was  peculiarly 
applied  to  Messiah,  "  He  whom  God  hath  sent,  the  sent  One, — 
the  One  whom  God  has  sent  into  the  world  according  to 
promise." 

[Spea/teth  the  words  of  God.]  This  sentence  means  that  Christ's 
words  were  not  the  words  of  a  mere  man,  like  John  himself  or 
one  of  the  prophets.  They  were  nothing  less  than  the  words 
of  God.  He  who  heard  them  heard  nothing  less  than  God 
speaking.  The  unity  of  the  Father  and  the  Son  is  so  close  that 
he  who  hears  the  teaching  of  the  Son  hears  the  teaching  of  the 
Father  also.  (Compare  John  vii.  16  ;  v.  19 ;  xiv.  10,  11 ;  viii.  28 ;  xii. 
49.)  When  John  the  Baptist  spoke,  he  spoke  merely  human 
words,  however  true,  and  good,  and  scriptural.  But  when 
Christ  ?poke,  He  spoke  divine  words,  even  the  words  of  God 
Himself.  As  Quesnel  says,  ''He  spoke  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  who 
is  His  own  Spirit,  who  inseparably  dwelleth  in  Him,  and  by 
the  possession  of  whose  fulness  He  receives  His  unction  and 
consecration." 

Theophylact  remarks  on  this  sentence  and  others  like  it  in  St. 
Swim's  Gospels,  that  we  must  not  suppose  that  Christ  needed  to 
be  taught  by  God  the  Father  what  to  speak,  because  whatever 
♦^'•c  Father  knows  the  Son  also  knows,  as  consubstantial  with 
Him.  So  also  when  we  read  of  the  Son  being  "  sent,"  we  must 
think  of  Him  as  a  ray  sent  from  the  sun,  which  is  not  in  reality 
separate  from  the  sun,  but  a  part  of  the  sun  itself. 

Some  think  that  the  expression,  "  speaketh  the  words  of  God," 
in  this  place,  has  special  reference  to  the  promise  given  to  Moses 
about  Messiah,  "  I  will  put  my  words  in  His  mouth."  (Deut. 
xviii.  18.) 

[For  God  giveth  not... Spirit  hy  measure... Htm.]  The  expression 
"by  measure,"  in  this  sentence,  means  "partially, — scantily, — 
stintedly, — in  small  degree."  It  is  the  opposite  to  "fully, — com- 
pletely,— in  unmeasured  abundance."  Thus  we  read  in  Ezekiel's 
descriptic  n  of  a  time  of  scarcity  at  Jerusalem,  "  They  shall  drink 
water  by  measure."  (Ezek.  iv.  16.) 


186  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

The  whole  sentence  is  peculiar,  and  requires  careful  interpieta- 
tion.  The  object  of  John  the  Baptist  is  to  show  once  more  the 
infinite  superiority  of  the  Lord  Jesus  over  himself  or  any  other 
man.  To  all  others,  even  to  the  most  eminent  prophets  and 
apostles,  God  gives  the  Holy  Spirit  "  by  measure,"  Their  gifts 
and  graces  are  both  imperfect.  As  St  Paul  says,  they  "  know  in 
part  and  prophesy  in  part."  (1  Cor.  xiii.  9.)  But  with  Him 
whom  Grod  hath  sent,  it  is  very  different.  To  Him  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  given  without  measure,  in  infinite  fulness  and  complete- 
ness. In  His  human  nature  the  gifts  and  graces  of  the  Spirit  are 
present  without  the  sUghtest  shadow  of  imperfection.  As  man, 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  anointed  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  fitted 
for  His  ofi&ce  as  our  Priest,  and  Prophet,  and  King,  in  a  way  and 
degree  never  granted  to  any  other  man.  (Acts  x.  38.) 

All  this  is  undoubtedly  true,  but  it  is  not,  in  my  opinion,  the 
whole  truth  of  the  sentence.  I  believe  that  John  the  Baptist 
points  not  only  to  our  Lord's  human  nature  but  to  His  divinity. 
I  believe  his  meaning  to  be,  "  He  whom  God  hath  sent,  is  One 
far  above  prophets  and  ministers,  to  whom  the  Spirit  is  only 
given  by  measure.  He  is  One  who  is  Himself  very  God.  In 
Him  dwelleth  all  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily.  He  is  One 
who,  as  a  Person  in  the  Trinity,  is  eternally  and  ineffably  united 
with  God  the  Holy  Spirit.  From  Him  the  Holy  Spirit  proceeds 
as  well  as  from  the  Father,  and  is  the  Spirit  of  Christ  and  the 
Spirit  of  the  Son.  As  God,  it  is  impossible  that  He  can  be 
separated  from  the  Holy  Spirit.  To  Him  therefore  the  Spirit  is 
not  given  by  measure,  as  if  He  were  only  a  man.  He  is  God  as 
well  as  man,  and  as  such  He  needeth  not  that  the  Spirit  should 
be  given  to  Him.  He  has  the  Spirit  without  measure,  because  in 
the  divine  essence,  He,  and  the  Spirit,  and  the  Father,  are  One, 
and  undivided." 

I  am  incHned  to  hold  the  view  just  stated,  because  of  the 
verse  which  follows.  The  object  cf  John  the  Baptist,  in  this  last 
testimony  to  Christ,  appears  to  be  to  lead  his  disciples  step  by 
step  to  the  highest  view  of  Messiah's  dignity.  He  would  have 
them  recognize  in  Him  One  who  was  very  God  as  well  as  very 
man.  The  view  of  the  sentence  before  us  which  is  commonly 
adopted,  appears  to  me  of  an  unsafe  tendency.  That  the  Spirit 
was  given  to  our  Lord  as  man,  and  given  without  measure,  is 
doubtless  true.  But  we  must  be  very  careful  that  we  never  forget 
a  truth  of  no  less  importance.  That  truth  is,  that  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  never  ceased  to  be  God  as  well  as  man,  and  that  as  God 
He  was  never  separate  from  the  Spirit,  As  Henry  says,  "  The 
Spirit  dwelt  in  Him,  not  as  in  a  vessd,  but  as  in  a  fountain,  as  iu 
a  bottomless  ocean." 

It  deserves  remark,  that  the  concluding  words  of  the  verse, 
"  unto  Him,"  are  not  found  in  the  original  Greek.     This  has  led 


JOHN,    CHAP.    III.  187 

some  to  maintain  that  the  second  clause  of  the  verse  is  only  a 
general  statement,  "  God  is  not  a  God  who  gives  the  Spirit  by 
mea  ure."  But  all  the  best  commentat(jrs,  from  Augustine  down- 
wards, hold  the  view  of  our  translators,  that  it  is  Christ  who 
is  signified,  and  that  "  unto  Him"  ought  to  be  supplied  in  any 
translation, 

Chemnitius  thinks  that  this  verse  specially  refers  to  Isaiah  xi. 
2,  where  it  is  predicted  that  the  seven-fold  gifts  of  the  Spirit 
shall  rest  on  Messiah. 

35. — {The  Father  hveth...Son...given  alL.hand.']  There  is  something, 
at  first  sight,  abrupt  and  elliptical  in  this  verse.  The  full  mean- 
ing of  it,  I  beheve  to  be  as  follows.  "  He  whom  God  hath  sent 
is  One  far  above  me  or  any  other  prophet.  He  is  the  eternal  Son 
of  God,  whom  the  Father  loved  from  all  eternity,  and  into  whose 
hands  all  things  concerning  man's  salvation  have  been  given  and 
committed  by  an  everlasting  covenant.  He  is  no  mere  man,  as 
you,  my  disciples,  ignorantly  suppose.  He  is  the  Son,  of  whom 
it  is  written,  '  Kiss  the  Son  lest  He  be  angry,  and  so  ye  perish 
from  the  way.'  He  is  the  Son  to  whom  the  Father  has  snid,  *I 
will  give  thee  the  heathen  for  thine  inheritance,  and  the  utter- 
most parts  of  the  earth  for  thy  possession.'  (Psalm  ii.  7 — 9.) 
Instead  of  being  jealous  of  his  present  popularity,  you  should 
serve  Him  with  fear,  and  rejoice  before  Him  with  trembling." 

The  "  love  of  the  Father  toward  the  Son,"  here  spoken  of,  is 
a  subject  far  too  deep  for  man  to  fathom.  It  is  an  expression 
graciously  accommodated  to  man's  feeble  understanding,  and 
intended  to  signify  that  most  intimate  and  inetfable  union  which 
exists  between  the  First  and  Second  Persons  in  the  blessed 
Trinity,  and  the  entire  approbation  and  complacency  wiih  which 
the  Father  regards  the  work  of  redemption  undertaken  by  the 
Son.  It  is  that  love  to  which  our  Lord  refers  in  the  words, 
"  Thou  lovedst  me  before  the  foundation  of  the  world,"  (John 
xvii.  24,)  and  which  the  Father  expressly  asserted  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Son's  earthly  ministry,  "  This  is  mj  beloved  Son,  in 
whom  I  am  well  pleased."  (Matt.  iii.  17.) 

When  it  says  that  "  the  Father  hath  given  all  things  into  the 
Son's  hand,"  we  must  understand  that  mediatorial  kingdom 
which  in  the  eternal  counsels  of  the  Trinity  has  been  appointed 
to  Christ.  By  the  terms  of  the  everlasting  covenant,  the  Father 
has  given  to  the  Son  power  over  all  flesh,  to  quicken  whom  He 
will — to  justify,  to  sanctify,  to  keep,  and  to  glorify  His  people, — 
to  judge,  and  finally  punish  the  wicked  and  unbelieving, — and  at 
last  to  take  to  Himself  a  kingdom  over  all  the  world,  and  put 
down  every  enemy  under  His  teet.  These  are  the  "  all  things/' 
of  which  cfoiin  speaks.     Christ,  he  would  have  us  know,  has  the 


188  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

keys  of  death  and  hell  in  His  hand,  and  to  Him  a' one  men  must 
go,  if  they  want  anything  for  their  souls. 

Calvin  observes  on  this  verse,  "  The  love  here  spoken  of  is 
that  peculiar  love  of  God,  which  beginning  with  ihe  Son  flowa 
from  Him  to  all  the  creatures.  For  that  love,  with  which, 
embracing  His  Son,  He  embraces  us  also  in  Him,  leads  Him  to 
communicate  all  His  benefits  to  us  by  His  hand." 

Quesnel  remarks,  "  God  loved  the  prophets  as  His  servants, 
out  He  loves  Christ  as  His  only  Son,  and  communicates  Himself 
to  Him  in  proportion  to  His  love." — "  The  prophets  had  only 
particular  commissions,  limited  to  a  certain  time  and  certain  pur- 
poses ;  but  Christ  has  full  power  given  Him  as  the  general 
disposer  of  all  His  Father's  works,  the  executor  of  His 
designs,  the  head  of  His  Church,  the  universal  High  Priest 
of  good  things  to  come,  the  steward  and  disposer  of  all  His 
graces." 

Chemnitius,  on  this  verse,  remarks  the  infinite  wisdom  and 
love  of  God  in  giving  the  management  of  our  souPs  affairs  into 
Christ's  hand.  We  are  all  naturally  so  weak  and  feeble,  that  h 
anything  was  left  in  our  hands  we  should  never  be  saved.  We 
should  lose  al',  even  sooner  than  Adam  did  in  Paradi-e.  But 
Christ  will  take  care  of  all  committed  to  His  charge,  and  our 
wisdom  is  to  commit  all  things  to  Him,  as  St.  Paul  did.  (2  Tim. 
L12.) 

ije.— [-Se  that  heUeveth...Son...Jiath..Mfe.]  In  this  verse  John  the 
Baptist  concludes  his  testimony  to  Christ,  by  a  solemn  decla  ation 
of  the  unspeakable  importance  of  believins:  on  Him.  Wiiether 
his  disciples  would  receive  it  or  not,"  he  tells  them  that  life  or 
death,  heaven  or  hell,  all  turned  on  believing  in  this  Jesub  vv^io 
had  "  been  with  him  beyond  Jordan." 

The  excellence  of  faith  should  be  noted  here.  Like  his  divine 
Master,  John  teaches  that  "  believing  on  the  Son,"  is  the  princi- 
pal thing  in  saving  religion.  Believing  is  the  way  to  heaven,  and 
not  believing  the  way  to  hell. 

The  "  presentness"  of  the  salvation  which  is  in  Christ  should 
be  here  noted.  Again,  like  his  divine  Master,  John  teaches  that 
a  believer  "  hath"  everlasting  life.  Pardon,  peace,  and  a  title  to 
heaven  are  at  once  and  immediately  a  man's  possession,  the  very 
moment  that  he  lays  his  sins  on  Jesus,  and  puts  his  trust  in 
Him. 

[Re  that  believeth  not.. .not  see  life]  The  Greek  word  here  ren- 
dered "believ3th  not,"  is  quite  different  from  the  one  translated 
"beheveth"  at  the  beginning  of  the  verse.  It  means  somethiig 
much  stronger  than  "  not  trusting."     It  would  be  more  hterally 


189 

rendered  "  He  that  does  not  obey,  or  is  disobedient  to."  It  is 
the  same  word  so  rendered  in  Rom.  ii.  8 ;  x.  21 ;  1  Pet.  ii.  8 ;  iii. 
1.  20. 

The  expression,  "  shall  not  see  life,"  must  of  course  mean, 
"  shall  not  see  life,  if  he  continues  impenitent  and  unbelieving, 
and  dies  in  that  state."  The  phrase  "  to  see  life,"  most  probably 
means  "to  taste,  enter,  enjoy,  possess  life,"  and  must  not  be 
literally  interpreted  as  seeing  either  with  bodily  or  mental  eyes 

[Tlie  lurath  of  God  abideth  on  him.]  This  concluding  sentence 
of  John  the  Baptist's  testimony,  is  again  very  like  his  Master's 
teaching,  "  He  that  believeth  not  is  condemned  already."  The 
meaning  of  the  sentence  is,  that  so  long  as  a  man  is  not  a  be- 
liever in  Christ,  the  just  wrath  of  Grod  hangs  over  him,  and  he 
is  under  the  curse  of  God's  broken  law.  We  are  all  by  nature 
born  in  sin,  and  children  of  wrath;  and  our  sins  are  all  upon  us, 
unpardoned,  unforgiven,  and  untaken  away,  until  that  day  when 
we  believe  on  the  Son  of  God  and  are  made  children  of  grace. 

The  sentence  is  a  very  instructive  one,  and  especially  SO  in  the 
present  day.  I  see  in  it  an  unanswerable  reply  to  some  grievous 
errors  which  are  very  prevalent  in  some  quarters. 

(a.)  It  condemns  the  notion,  upheld  by  some,  that  under  the 
Gospel  there  is  no  more  anger  in  God,  and  that  he  is  only  love, 
mercy,  and  compassion,  and  nothing  else.  Here  we  are  plainly 
told  of  "  the  wrath  of  God."  It  is  clear  that  God  hates  sin. 
There  is  a  hell.     God  can  be  angry.     Sinners  ought  to  be  afraid. 

(h.)  It  condemns  the  notion,  maintained  by  some,  that  the 
elect  are  justified  from  all  eternity,  or  justified  before  they  be- 
lieve. Here  we  are  plainly  told  that  if  a  man  believe  not  on  the 
Son,  God's  wrath  abideth  on  him.  We  know  nothing  of  any 
one's  justification  until  he  beheves.  Those  whom  God  predes- 
tinates, God  calls  and  justifies  in  due  season.  But  there  is  no 
justification  until  there  is  faith. 

(c.)  It  condemns  the  modern  idea,  that  Christ  by  His  death, 
justified  all  mankind,  and  removed  God's  wrath  from  the  whole 
seed  of  Adam ;  and  that  all  men  and  women  are  justified  in 
reality,  though  they  do  not  know  it,  and  will  all  finally  be  saved. 
This  idea  sounds  very  amiable,  but  is  flatly  contrary  to  the  text 
before  us.  Hei-e  we  are  plainly  told,  that  until  a  man  ''  believeth 
on  the  Son  of  God,  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him." 

{d.)  Finally,  it  condemns  the  weak  and  false  charity  of  those 
who  say,  that  preachers  of  the  Gospel  should  never  speak  of 
God's  wrath,  and  should  never  mention  hell.  Here  we  find  that 
the  last  words  of  one  of  Christ's  best  servants  consist  of  a 
solemn  declaration  of  the  danger  of  unbeUef.     "The  wrath  of 


190 


EXPOSIl'ORY   THOUGHTS. 


God"  is  John's  last  thought.  To  warn  men  of  God's  wrath, 
and  of  their  danger  of  hell,  is  not  harshness,  but  true  charity. 
Many  will  go  to  hell,  because  their  ministers  never  told  them 
about  hell. 

In  leaving  the  passage,  the  variety  of  expressions  used  by  John 
the  Baptist  concerning  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  is  very  worthy  of 
notice.  He  calls  Him  the  Christ, — the  bridegroom, — Him  that 
cometh  from  above, — Him  that  testifieth  what  He  hath  seen  and 
heard, — Him  whom  God  hath  sent, — Him  who  has  the  Spirit 
without  measure, — Him  whom  the  Father  loves, — Him  into 
whose  hands  all  things  are  given, — Him  in- whom  to  believe  ia 
everlasting  life.  To  talk  of  John  the  Baptist's  knowledge  of  di- 
vine things  as  meagre  and  scanty,  in  the  face  of  such  a  passage 
as  thi-;,  is,  to  say  the  h  ast,  not  wise,  and  argues  a  very  slight 
acquaintance  with  Scripture.  To  suppose,  as  some  do,  that  the 
man  who  had  such  clear  views  oi  our  Lord's  nature  and  ofl&ce, 
could  afterwards  doubt  whether  Jesus  was  the  Christ,  is  to  sup- 
pose what  is  grossly  improbable.  The  message  that  John  sent  to 
Jesus  when  he  was  in  prison,  was  for  the  sake  of  his  disciples, 
and  not  for  his  own  satisfaction.  (Matt.  xi.  3,  &c.) 


JOHN  lY.  1—6. 


1  When  therefore  the  Lord  knew 
how  the  Pharisees  had  heard  that 
Jesus  made  and  baptized  more  dis- 
ciples than  John, 

2  (Though  Jesus  himself  bap- 
tized not,  but  his  disciples,) 

3  He  left  Judaea,  and  departed 
again  into  GaUlee. 

4  And  he  must  needs  go  through 
Samaria. 


5  Then  cometh  he  to  a  city  of 
Samaria,  which  is  called  Sychar, 
near  to  the  parcel  of  ground  that 
Jacob  gave  to  his  son  Joseph. 

6  Now  Jacob's  well  was  there. 
Jesus  therefore,  being  wearied  with 
his  journey,  sat  thus  on  the 
well :  and  it  was  about  the  sixth 
hour. 


There  are  two  sayings  in  these  verses  which  deserve  par- 
ticular notice.  They  throw  light  on  two  subjects  in  reli- 
gion, on  which  clear  and  well  defined  opinions  are  of  great 
importance. 

We  should  observe,  for  one  thing,  what  is  said  about 
haptism.  We  read  that  "  Jesus  himself  baptized  not,  but 
his  disciples." 

The  expression  here  used  is  a  very  remarkable  one.  In 
reading  it  we  seem  irresistibly  led  to  one  instructive  con- 


191 

elusion.  That  conclusion  is,  that  baptism  is  not  the  prin- 
cipal part  of  Christianity,  and  that  to  baptize  is  not  the 
principal  work  for  which  Christian  ministei'S  are  ordained. 
Frequently  we  read  of  our  Lord  preaching  and  praying. 
Once  we  read  of  His  administering  the  Lord's  supper. 
But  we  have  not  a  single  instance  recorded  of  His  ever 
baptizing  any  one.  And  here  we  are  distinctly  told,  that 
it  was  a  subordinate  work,  which  He  left  to  others.  Jesus 
"  himself  baptized  not,  but  his  disciples." 

The  lesson  is  one  of  peculiar  importance  in  the  present 
day.  Baptism,  as  a  sacrament  ordained  by  Christ  Himself, 
is  an  honourable  ordinance,  and  ought  never  to  be  lightly 
esteemed  in  the  churches.  It  cannot  be  neglected  or  de- 
spised without  great  sin.  When  rightly  used,  with  faith 
and  prayer,  it  is  calculated  to  convey  the  highest  blessings. 
But  baptism  was  never  meant  to  be  exalted  to  the  position 
which  many  now-a-days  assign  to  it  in  religion.  It  does 
not  act  as  a  charm.  It  does  not  necessarily  convey  the 
grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  benefit  of  it  depends 
greatly  on  the  manner  in  which  it  is  used.  The  doctrine 
taught,  and  the  language  employed  about  it,  in  some  quar- 
ters, are  utterly  inconsistent  with  the  fact  announced  in 
the  text.  If  baptism  was  all  that  some  say  it  is,  we  should 
never  have  been  told,  that  "  Jesus  himself  baptized  not.'* 

Let  it  be  a  settled  principle  in  our  minds  that  the  first 
and  chief  business  of  the  Church  of  Christ  is  to  preach 
the  Gospel.  The  words  of  St.  Paul  ought  to  be  constantly 
remembered, — "  Christ  sent  me  not  to  baptize,  but  to 
preach  the  Gospel."  (1  Cor.  i.  17.)  When  the  Gospel  of 
Christ  is  faithfully  and  fully  preached  we  need  not  fear 
that  the  sacraments  will  be  undervalued.  Baptism  and 
the  Lord's  supper  will  always  be  most  truly  reverenced  in 
those  churches  where  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus  is  most 
fully  taught  and  known. 

We  should  observe,  for  another  thing,  in  this  passage, 


192  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

what  is  said  about  our  JOord^s  human  nature.  We  read 
that  Jesus  was  "  weaned  with  his  journey." 

We  learn  from  this,  as  well  as  many  other  expressions 
in  the  Gospels,  that  our  Lord  had  a  body  exactly  like  our 
own.  When  "  the  Word  became  flesh,"  He  took  on  Him 
a  nature  like  our  own  in  all  things,  sin  only  excepted. 
Like  ourselves.  He  grew  from  infancy  to  youth,  and  from 
youth  to  man's  estate.  Like  ourselves.  He  hungered, 
thirsted,  felt  pain,  and  needed  sleep.  He  was  liable  to 
every  sinless  infirmity  to  which  we  are  liable.  In  all  things 
His  body  was  framed  like  our  own. 

The  truth  before  us  is  full  of  comtort  for  all  who  are 
true  Christians.  He  to  whom  sinners  are  bid  to  come  for 
pardon  and  peace,  is  one  who  is  man  as  well  as  God.  He 
had  a  real  human  nature  when  He  was  upon  earth.  He 
took  a  real  human  nature  with  Him,  when  He  ascended  up 
into  heaven.  We  have  at  tbe  right  hand  of  God  a  High 
Priest  who  can  be  touched  with  the  feeling  of  our  infirmi- 
ties, because  He  has  suffered  Himself  being  tempted. 
When  we  cry  to  Him  in  the  hour  of  bodily  pain  and  weak- 
ness. He  knows  well  what  we  mean.  When  our  prayers 
and  praises  are  feeble  through  bodily  weariness.  He  can 
understand  our  condition.  He  knows  our  frame.  He  has 
learned  by  experience  what  it  is  to  be  a  man.  To  say  that 
the  Virgin  Mary,  or  any  one  else,  can  feel  more  sympathy 
for  us  than  Christ,  is  ignorance  no  less  than  blasphemy. 
The  man  Christ  Jesus  can  enter  fully  into  everything  that 
belongs  to  man's  condition.  The  poor,  the  sick,  and  the 
suffering,  have  in  heaven  One  who  is  not  only  an  almighty 
Saviour,  but  a  most  feeling  Friend. 

The  servant  of  Christ  should  grasp  firmly  this  great 
truth,  that  there  are  two  perfect  and  complete  natures  in 
the  one  Person  whom  he  serves.  The  Lord  Jesus,  in  whom 
the  Gospel  bids  us  believe,  is,  without  doubt,  almighty 
God, --equal  to  the  Father  in  all  things,  and  able  to  save 


JOHN,    CHAP.    IV.  193 

to  the  uttermost  all  those  that  come  unto  God  by  Him. 
But  that  same  Jesus  is  no  less  certainly  perfect  man, — able 
to  sympathize  with  man  in  all  his  bodily  sufferings,  and 
acquainted  by  experience  with  all  that  man's  body  has  to 
endure.  Power  and  sympathy  are  marvellously  combined 
in  Him-  who  died  for  us  on  the  cross.  Because  He  is  God 
we  may  repose  the  weight  of  our  souls  upon  Him  with  un- 
hesitating confidence.  He  is  mighty  to  save. — Because  He 
is  man,  we  may  speak  to  Him  with  freedom,  about  the 
many  trials  to  which  flesh  is  heir.  He  knows  the  heart  of 
a  man. — Here  is  rest  for  the  weary  !  Here  is  good  news ! 
Our  Redeemer  is  man  as  well  as  God,  and  God  as  well  as 
man.  He  that  believeth  on  Him,  has  everything  that  a 
child  of  Adam  can  possibly  require,  either  for  safety  or  for 
peace. 

Notes.    John  TV.  1 — 6. 

1. — [When  therefore  the  Lord  Tcneiv,  <&c.]  The  connection  between 
this  chapter  and  the  last  will  be  found  at  the  25th  verse  of  the 
last  chapter.  The  controversy  between  John's  disciples  and  the 
Jews  was  the  means  of  calling  pubHc  attention  to  our  Lord's 
ministry.  It  became  a  subject  of  common  conversation,  and 
attracted  the  notice  of  the  principal  religious  teachers  of  the 
Jews,  viz.,  the  Pharisees.  They  had  already  been  disturbed 
by  the  ministry  of  John  the  Baptist,  and  the  crowds  which 
attended  it.  (John  i.  19—28.)  The  deputation  which  they  sent 
to  John  had  been  distinctly  told  by  him  that  One  greater  than 
himself  w'^s  about  to  appear.  When  therefore  "  the  Pharisees 
heard"  mat  Jesus  was  actually  baptizing  more  disciples,  and 
attracting  more  attention  than  John,  we  can  well  imagine  that 
their  minds  would  be  even  more  disturbed  than  before.  A  vague 
uncomtortable  feeUng  would  arise  in  their  hearts,  that  this  mys- 
terious person,  who  had  cast  out  of  the  temple  the  buyers  and 
sellers  in  so  miraculous  a  manner,  and  was  now  baptizing  so 
many  disciples,  might  possibly  be  -the  Christ.  And  then  would 
come  the  attendant  feeling,  that  if  this  was  the  Christ,  He  was 
not  the  Christ  tliey  either  expected  or  wanted.  The  result  of 
both  feehngs  would  probably  be  a  bitter  enmity  against  our 
Lord,  and  a  secret  determination,  if  possible,  to  settle  all  doubta 
by  putting  Hun  to  death. 

In  what  manner  our  Lord  ''  knew  '*  what  the  Pharisees  had 
9 


194  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

heard,  we  need  not  be  careful  to  inquire.  Possibly  He  knew  it 
from  information  obtained  by  His  disciples.  We  can  hardly 
doubt  that  some  of  them  kept  up  intercourse  with  their  old 
master,  John  the  Baptist,  and  so  learned  what  was  going  on 
at  ^non. — It  is  more  probable  that  He  knew  it  from  His  om- 
niscience as  God.  We  are  frequently  told  that  "  He  knew  the 
thoughts  "  of  His  enemies,  and  acted  and  spoke  accordingly.  It 
is  good  for  us  all  to  remember  that  nothing  is  spoken,  talked  of, 
or  reported  among  men,  however  secretly,  which  Christ  does  not 
know. 

2. — {^Though  Jesus  himself  baptized  not.  c&c]  The  fact  that  our 
Lord  did  not  actually  administer  baptism  with  His  own  hands, 
is  only  mentioned  here  in  the  Gospels,  and  is  noteworthy.  It 
shows,  at  any  rate,  that  what  is  done  by  Christ's  ministers,  at 
Christ's  command,  in  the  administration  of  ordinances,  is  regarded 
as  done  by  Christ  Himself.  The  preceding  verse  says  that  "  Jesus 
baptized,"  while  the  present  one  says,  that  He  '^  baptized  not." 
Lightfoot  remarks,  "It  is  ordinary,  bath  in  Scripture  phrase  and 
in  other  language,  to  speak  of  a  thing  as  done  by  a  man  himself, 
which  is  done  by  another  at  his  appointment.  So  Pharaoh's 
daughter  is  said  to  'nurse  Moses,'  and  Solomon  is  said  to  'build 
the  temple  and  his  own  house.'  So  David  '  took  Saul's  spear  and 
cruse,'  meaning  Abishai  by  David's  appointment,"  (1  Sam, 
xxvi.  12.) 

The  reasons  assigned  for  our  Lord's  not  administering  baptism 
with   His    own   hands,   are    various.     Lightfoot  mentions  four. 

1.  "  Because  he  was  not  sent  so  much  to  baptize  as  to  preach. 

2.  Because  it  might  have  been  taken  as  a  thing  somewhat  im- 
proper for  Christ  to  baptize  in  His  own  name.  3.  Because  the 
baptizing  tliat  was  most  proper  for  Christ  to  use,  w^as  not  with 
Avater,  but  with  the  Holy  Ghost.  4.  Because  he  would  prevent 
all  quarrels  and  disputes  among  men  about  their  baptism,  which 
might  have  risen  if  some  had  been  baptized  by  Christ,  and  others 
only  by  His  disciples.'' 

To  these  reasons  we  may  add  another  of  considerable  import- 
ance. Oar  Lord  would  show  us  that  the  effect  and  benefit  of 
baptism  do  not  depend  on  the  person  w^ho  administers  it.  We 
carniot  doubt  that  Judas  Iscariot  baptized  some.  The  intention 
of  the  minister  does  not  affect  the  vahdity  of  the  sacrament. 

One  thing  seems  abundantly  clear,  and  that  is,  that  baptism 
is  not  an  ordinance  of  primary,  but  of  subordinate  importance 
in  Christianity.  The  high-flown  and  extravagant  language  used 
by  some  divines  about  the  sacrament  of  baptism  and  its  effects, 
is  quite  irreconcilable  with  the  text  before  us,  as  well  as  with  the 
general  teaching  of  Scripture.  (See  Acts  x.  48;   1  Cor.  i.  17.) 

3. — [He  Itft  Jvdoea^  &c.'\   The  context  of  the  preceding  verses  seems 


JOHN,    CHAP.   IV.  195 

to  sLowthat  this  movement  was  intended  to  avciu  the  vlesicrns  of 
the  Pharisees  against  our  Lord.  If  he  had  rcmaiue  I  in  Judaea, 
He  would  have  been  cut  off,  and  pat  to  death  before  the  ap- 
pointed time.  He  therefore  withdrew  into  the  province  of  Gali- 
lee, where  He  was  further  off  from  Jerusalem,  and  where  His 
ministry  would  attract  less  public  notice. 

Our  Lord's  conduct  on  this  occasion  shows  us  that  it  is  not 
obligatory  on  a  Christian  to  await  danger  to  life  and  person, 
when  he  sees  it  coming,  and  that  it  is  not  cowardice  to  use  ai' 
reasonable  means  to  avoid  it.  We  are  not  to  court  martyrdom, 
or  needlessly  to  throw  our  lives  awav.  There  is  a  time  for  all 
things, — a  time  to  live  and  work,  as  well  as  a  time  to  suffer  and  to 
die.  Whether  some  of  the  primitive  martj'-rs  would  have  acted 
as  our  Lord  did  here  may  be  questioned.  Their  zeal  for  martyr- 
dom seems  sometimes  to  have  paitaken  of  the  character  of 
fanaticism. 

i. — [He  must  needs  go  through  Samaria.']  Many  pious  and  pro- 
fitable remarks  have  been  made  on  this  expression.  It  ha<*  been 
thought  to  teach  that  our  Lord  went  purposely,  and  out  of  the 
regular  road,  in  order  to  save  the  soul  of  the  Samaritan  woman. 
It  admits  of  grave  question  whether  this  opinion  is  well-founded. 
— There  was  no  other  way  by  which  a  person  could  conveniently 
go  from  Judaea  to  Galilee,  excepting  through  Samaria. — The" 
expression,  therefore,  is  probably  nothing  more  than  a  natural 
introduction  to  the  story  of  the  Samaritan  woman.  The  first  in 
the  train  of  circumstances  which  led  to  her  conversion,  was  the 
circumstance  that  Jesus  was  obligeil  to  pass  through  Samaria, 
on  His  journey  towards  Gahlee.  This  accounted  for  His  meeting 
with  a  Samaritan  woman. 

5. — [Then  cometh....city... .called  Sychar.]  The  common  opinion  is, 
that  the  city  here  spoken  of  is  the  same  as  Siehem  or  Shechem. 
(Gen.  xxxiii.  18,  19.)  Few  places  in  Palestine,  afcer  Jerusalem, 
have  had  so  much  of  Bible  history  connected  with  them.  Here 
God  first  appeared  to  Abraham.  (Gen.  xii.  6.)  Here  Jacob  dwelt 
when  he  first  relurned  from  Padan-aram,  and  heie  the  disgraceful 
history  of  Dinah,  and  the  consequent  murder  (-f  the  Shechemites 
took  place.  (Gen.  xxxiv.  2,  &c.)  Here  Jo.^epli's  bretliren  fed 
their  flocks  when  Jacob  sent  him  to  them,  little  thinking  he 
would  never  see  him  again  for  many  years.  (Gen.  xxxvii.  12.) 
Here,  when  Israel  took  possess' on  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  was 
one  of  the  cities  of  refuge.  (Josh.  xx.  7,8.)  Here  Joshua  gathered 
all  the  tribes  when  he  addressed  them  for  the  last  time.  (Josh, 
xxiv  1.)  Here  the  bones  of  Joseph  were  buried,  and  all  the 
patriarchs  were  interred.  (Josh.  xxiv.  32 ;  Acts,  vii.  16.)  Here 
the  principal  events  in  the  history  of  Abimelech  took  place. 
(Judges  ix.  1,  &c.)    Here  Rehoboam  met  the  tribes  of  Israel  after 


196  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Solomor's  death,  and  jrave  the  answer  which  rent  his  kingdoir, 
in  two.  (1  Kings,  xii.  1.)  Here  Jeroboam  first  dwelt,  when  he 
was  made  king  of  Israel.  (1  Kings  xii.  25.)  And  finally,  close 
bv  Shechem  was  the  city  of  Samaria  itself,  and  the  two  hills  of 
Ebal  and  Gerizini,  where  tlie  solemn  blessings  and  cur-ings  were 
recited,  after  Israel  entered  Canaan.  (Josh.  viii.  33.)  A  more 
interesting  neighbourhood  it  is  difficult  to  imagine.  Whichever 
way  the  eye  of  a  wearied  traveller  looked,  he  would  see  some- 
thing to  remind  him  of  Israel's  history. 

It  is  only  fair  to  say  that  one  of  the  latest  travellers  in  Pales 
tine  (Dr.  Thomson,  author  of  "  The  Land  and  the  Book,")  doubts 
whether  Sychar  and  Shechem  really  were  the  same  place.  He 
grounds  his  doubt  on  the  fact  that  the  well  now  called  Jacob's 
well  is  two  miles  from  the  ruins  of  Shechem,  and  that  close  to 
these  ruins  are  beautiful  fountains  of  water.  He  thinks  it  highly 
improbable  that  a  woman  of  Shechem  would  go  two  miles  to 
draw  water,  if  she  could  find  it  close  by.  He  therefore  thinks  it 
more  likely  that  a  place  now  called  Aschar,  which  is  close  to 
Jacob's  well,  must  be  the  ancient  Sychar,  and  that  Sychar  and 
Shechem  were  two  different  places. 

The  subject  is  one  on  which  it  is  impossible  to  attain  a  conclu- 
sive decision.  Whether  the  ruins  now  called  the  ruins  of  Shechem 
are  really  on  the  site  of  ancient  Shechem, — whether  the  well 
now  called  Jacob's  well  is  really  the  well  spoken  of  in  this 
chapter, — whether  ancient  Shechem  may  not  have  been  nearer 
the  well  than  it  now  appears, — are  all  points  on  which,  after 
eighteen  hundred  years  have  passed  away,  it  is  impossible  to 
fpeak  positively.  It  ought,  however,  to  be  remembered,  that 
the  opinion  of  most  competent  judges  is  almost  entirely  against 
Dr.  Thomson's  theory.  Moreover,  it  is  worth  noticing  that  the 
Samaritan  woman's  words,  ''  Neither  come  hither  to  draw,"  seem 
to  imply  that  she  had  to  come  some  distance  to  Jacob's  well 
when  she  drew  water. 

[A^ea7\...pa7xel....ground....Jacol),... Joseph.]  The  ground  here 
spoken  of  seems  to  consist  of  two  parts.  One  part  was  bought 
by  Jacob  of  Hamor,  Shechem's  father,  for  a  hundred  pieces  of 
silver.  (Gen.  xxxiii.  29.)  The  other  seems  to  have  been  his  by 
conquest,  when  his  sons  slew  the  Shechemites  for  dishonouring 
Dinah.  (Gen.  xxxiv.  28,  and  xlviii.  22.) 

Let  it  be  carefully  noted  that  St.  John  here  speaks  of  Jacob 
and  Joseph  and  the  events  of  their  lives,  as  if  the  history  con- 
tained in  Genesis  was  all  simple  matter  of  fact.  It  is  always 
so  in  the  New  Testament.  The  modern  theory,  that  the  histories 
of  the  Old  Testament  are  only  fables,  destitute  of  any  foundation 
in  fact,  is  a  mere  baseless  invention,  without  a  single  respectabla 
argument  to  be  adduced  in  its  favour. 


197 

6. — [JacoVs  well]  It  is  not  known  how  or  when  this  well  received 
its  name.  In  Genesis  Ave  find  mention  of  Abraham  and  Isaac 
diggino:  wells,  but  not  of  Jacob  doing  so.  All  we  know  about  it 
is  what  we  read  in  the  chapter  before  us, 

A  well  called  Jacob's  well  is  still  shown  to  all  travellers  in 
Palestine,  near  the  ruins  of  Shechem,  and  is  commonly  supposed 
to  be  one  of  the  oldest  and  most  genuine  remains  of  ancitut 
times  in  the  Ho'y  Land.  In  fact  there  seems  no  reason  for  dis- 
puting the  common  belief,  that  it  is  the  veiy  identical  well  at 
which  our  Lord  sat  and  held  the  conversation  recorded  in  thi3 
chapter.    It  is  in  good  preservation,  and  about  thirty  yards  deep, 

[  Wearied  with  Ms  journey^  This  expression  deserves  notice. 
It  shows  the  reality  of  our  Lord's  human  nature.  He  had  a 
body  hke  our  own,  subject  to  all  the  conditions  of  flesh  and 
blood. — It  shows  our  Lord's  infinite  compassion,  humility,  and 
condescension,  when  He  became  flesh,  and  came  on  earth  to  live 
and  die  for  our  sins.  Though  He  was  rich  He  became  poor.  He 
who  had  made  the  world,  and  whose  were  "the  cattle  on  a  thou- 
sand hills,"  was  content  to  be  a  weary  traveller  on  foot,  in  order 
to  provide  eternal  redemption  for  us.  We  never  read  of  Jesus 
travelling  in  a  carriage,  and  only  once  of  His  riding  on  a  beast. 
— It  supplies  the  poor  with  the  strongest  argument  for  content- 
ment. If  Christ  was  willing  to  be  poor,  we  may  surely  be  willing 
to  submit  to  poverty.  Men  need  not  be  ashamed  of  poverty, 
if  they  have  not  brought  it  on  themselves  by  misconduct.  It  is 
disgraceful  to  be  profligate  and  immoral.  But  it  is  no  sin  to  be 
poor. — Finally,  it  shows  believers  what  a  sympathizing  Saviour 
Christ  is.  He  knows  what  it  is  to  have  a  weak  and  weary 
body.  He  can  be  touched  with  the  feeling  of  our  infirmities. 
When  our  work  wearies  us,  though  we  are  not  weary  of  our 
work,  we  may  confidently  tell  Jesus,  and  ask  Him  for  help.  He 
knows  the  heart  of  a  weary  man. 

l^Sat  thus  on  the  well.]  The  general  meaning  of  these  words 
is,  that  our  Lord  sat  down  on  the  stones,  which,  according  to 
Eastern  custom,  formed  a  wall  or  battlement  round  the  mouth 
of  the  well.  The  particular  meaning  of  the  word  "  thus  "  in  the 
sentence,  is  a  point  that  has  perplexed  commentators  in  every 
age,  and  will  perhaps  never  be  settled. 

Some  think,  as  De  Dieu,  A.  Clarke,  and  Schleusner,  that 
"thus"  is  a  pleonasm,  or  elegant  expletive  and  redundancy  in 
the  Greek  original,  and  that  although  a  Greek  would  see  a 
meaning  in  it,  as  giving  a  finish  to  the  sentence,  it  has  no  spe- 
cial meaning  that  can  be  attached  to  it  in  the  English  transla- 
tion. 

Some  think,  as  Chrysostom,  Theophylact,  Euthymius,  Muscu-. 
lus,  Bengel,  Glassius,  and  Wordsworth,  that  ''thus"  means  "just 


198  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

as  He  was,"  without  any  regular  scat,  without  looking  for  any 
convenient  position,  without  any  pride  or  formality,  not  upon  a 
throne,  not  upon  a  cushion,  but  simply  upon  the  ground. 

Some  think,  as  Doddridge,  that  "  thus "  means  immediately, 
and  find  a  parallel  for  it  in  Acts  xx.  11. 

Some  think,  as  Calvin,  Lightfoot,  Dyke,  Bullinger,  Beza, 
Parkhurst,  Stier,  Alford,  and  Burgon,  that  "  thus  "  refers  to  the 
weariness  just  mentioned.  Jesus,  being  wearied,  sat  down  on 
the  well  accordingly,  after  the  manner  and  according  to  the 
fashion  that  any  weary  person  would  sit.  He  was  weary,  and 
so  He  sat  on  the  well. 

The  question  is  one  that  I  feel  unable  to  settle.  The  last 
meaning  seems  to  me,  on  the  whole,  the  most  probable  one, 
though  it  fiails  to  carry  complete  conviction  with  it.  The  use  of 
the  word  "so,"  in  Acts  vii.  8,  is  somewhat  like  it.  The  Greek 
word  for  "  so  "  in  that  case  is  the  same  as  the  one  here  rendered 
"  thus." 

Burgon  remarks  on  this  sentence,  "  that  Jacob  and  Moses  each 
found  his  future  wife  beside  a  well  of  water ;  and  here  it  is  seen 
that  One  greater  than  they,  their  divine  Antitype,  the  Bride- 
groom takes  to  Himself  His  alien  spouse,  the  Samaritan  Church, 
at  a  well  likewise." 

Quesnel  remarks,  "  The  rest  of  Jesus  Christ  is  as  mysterious 
and  full  of  kindness  and  beneficence  as  His  weariness. — It  is  a 
great  matter  for  a  man  to  learn  how  to  rest  Himself  without 
being  idle,  and  to  make  his  necessary  repose  subservient  to  the 
Glory  of  God." 

'[It  ivas  about  the  sixth  hour.]  What  time  of  the  day  was  this, 
according  to  our  calculation  of  time  ? — By  far  the  most  common 
opinion  is,  that  the  sixth  hour  here  means  twelve  o'clock,  the 
hottest  and  sultriest  time  of  the  day.  It  is  notorious  that  the 
■  Jewish  day  began  at  six  o'clock  in  the  evening.  Our  seven 
o'clock  was  tlieir  one  o'clock,  and  their  sixth  hour  would  be  our 
twelve  o'clock. 

It  is  however  only  just  and  right  to  say,  that  some  commenta- 
tors, as  Wordsworth  and  Burgon,  maintain  strongly  that  in  St. 
John's  Gospel  the  Jewish  mode  of  reckoning  the  hours  of  the 
day  is  not  observed.  They  say  that,  writing  later  than  the  other 
Evangelists,  and  in  Asia  Minor,  St.  John  uses  the  Roman  or 
Asiatic  mode  of  reckoning  time,  and  that  the  Roman  mode  w  ;8 
like  our  own.  They  say,  therefore,  that  when  the  disciples  f  )!• 
lowed  Jesus,  (John  i.  39,*^)  at  the  tenth  hour,  it  wns  ten  o'.;lock  in 
the  morning,  and  when  the  fever  left  the  ruLr's  ?on  at  the 
seventh  hour,  it  was  seven  o'clock  in  the  evening.  (John  iv.  52.) 
They  say  that  when  Pilate  brought  f  rih  Jesus  to  the  Jews,  on 


JOHN,    CHAP.    TV.  199 

the  day  of  the  crucifixion,  at  the  sixth  hour,  (John  xix.  14,)  it 
was  six  o'clock  in  the  morning.  And  finally,  they  saw  thit  when 
Jesus,  in  the  passage  before  us,  sat  wearied  on  flie  well  a'  the 
sixth  hour,  it  means  six  o'clock  in  t!ie  evening.  Moreover,  they 
plead  in  support  of  their  view,  that  it  is  inhn't  ly  more  likely 
that  a  woman  would  come  to  a  well  to  draw  water  at  S'x  o'clock 
in  the  evening  than  at  twelve  o'clock  ia  the  day.  In  Gen  sis  it 
is  dis  inctly  said  that  the  "evening"  is  the  "  time  that  women 
go  out  to  draw  water."  (Gen.  xxiv.  11.) 

These  arguments  are  undoubtedly  weighty  and  ingenious,  and 
the  matter  is  one  that  admits  of  doubt.  Nevertheless,  for  several 
reasons,  I  am  disposed  to  think  that  the  common  view  of  the 
question  is  the  correct  one,  and  that  the  sixth  hour  in  this  place 
means  twelve  o'clock  in  the  day.  I  purposely  omit  the  con- 
sideration of  the  other  places  where  St.  John  mentions  hours  in 
his  Gospel.  None  of  them  seem  to  me  to  present  any  difficulty, 
except  the  "  sixth  hour,"  in  St.  John's  account  of  the  crucifixion'. 
That  difficulty  I  shall  be  prepared  to  examine  in  its  proper  place. 
I  think  then  that  the  "  sixth  hour  "  in  the  text  before  us,  means 
twelve  o'clock,  for  the  following  reasons  : 

(a.)  It  seems  exceedingly  improbable  that  St.  John  would 
reckon  time  in  a  manner  different  to  the  other  three  Gospel- 
writers. 

(J.)  It  is  by  no  means  clear  that  the  Romans  did  reckon  time 
in  our  way,  and  not  in  the  Jewish  way.  When  the  Roman  poet 
Horace  describes  himself  as  lying  late  in  bed  in  a  morning,  he 
says,  "  I  lie  till  the  fourth  hour."  He  must  surely  mean  ten 
o'clock,  and  not  four  in  the  afternoon. — When  the  Roman  poet 
Martial  describes  the  Roman  day,  he  says,  "  The  first  and  second 
hours  are  employed  by  clients  in  attending  levees,  and  the  third 
hour  exercises  the  advocates  in  the  law-courts." — He  surely  can- 
not mean  that  Roman  law-courts  did  not  open  till  two  o'clock 
in  the  afternoon.  About  the  custom  of  the  Asiatics  I  offer  no 
opinion.     It  is  a  doubtful  point. 

(c.)  It  is  entirely  a  gratuitous  assumption  to  say  that  no 
woman  ever  came  to  draw  water  except  in  the  evening.  There 
must  surely  be  exceptions  to  every  rule.  The  fact  of  the  woman 
coming  alone,  seems  of  itself  to  indicate  that  she  came  at  an 
unusual  hour,  and  not  in  the  evening. 

{d.)  Last,  but  not  least,  it  seems  far  more  probable  that  our 
Lord  would  hold  a  conversation  alone  with  such  a  person  as  the 
Samaritan  woman  at  twelve  o'clock  in  the  day,  than  at  six 
o'clock  in  the  evening.  The  conversation  was  not  a  very  short 
one.  Ihere  is  little  or  no  twilight  in  Eastern  countries.  The 
night  soon  comes  on.  And  yet,  on  the  theory  I  oppose,  our 
Lord  ])egins  a  conversation  about  six  o'clock,  and  carries  it  on 


200  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

till  the  woman  is  converted.  Then  the  froman  goes  away  to  the 
city  and  tells  the  men  what  has  happened,  and  they  all  come  out 
to  the  well  to  see  Jesus.  Yet  by  this  time,  in  all  reasonable  pro- 
bability, it  would  be  quite  dark,  and  the  night  would  have  begun. 
And  yet,  after  all  this,  our  Lord  says  to  the  disciples,  "  Lift  up 
your  eyes,  and  look  on  the  fields."  (iv.  35.) 

This  last  reason  weighs  very  heavily  in  my  mind,  :ii  forming 
a  conclusion  on  the  subject.  Oar  Lord  appears  to  me  t)  have 
reached  a  resting-place  for  the  mid(ile  of  the  day,  according  to 
the  Eastern  custom  in  travelUng,  and  to  have  intended  staying 
by  the  well  for  a  short  time,  till  the  heat  of  the  day  was  past. 
The  arrival  of  the  Samaritan  woman  at  this  hour  of  the  day  gave 
ample  time  for  the  conversation,  for  her  rapid  return  to  the  city, 
and  for  the  coming  of  the  inhabitants  to  the  well. 

I  must  say  that  I  see  a  peculiar  beauty  and  fitness  in  the  men- 
tion of  the  sixth  hour,  if  it  means  twelve  o'clock,  which  I  should 
not  see  so  strongly  if  it  meant  six  in  the  evening.  To  my  eyes 
there  is  a  special  seemliness  and  propriety  in  the  fact  that  our 
Lord  held  His  conversation  with  such  a  person  as  this  Samaritan 
woman  at  noon  day.  When  He  talked  to  Nicodemus,  in  the 
preceding  chapter,  we  are  told  that  it  was  at  night.  But  when 
He  talked  to  a  woman  of  impure  life,  we  are  carefully  told  that 
it  was  twelve  o'clock  in  the  day.  I  see  in  this  fact  a  beautiful 
carefulness  to  avoid  even  the  appearance  of  evil,  which  I  should 
entirely  miss  if  the  sixth  hour  meant  six  o'clock  in  the  evening. 
I  see  even  more  than  this.  I  see  a  lesson  to  all  ministers  and 
teachers  of  the  Gospel  about  the  right  mode  of  carrying  on  the 
work  of  trying  to  do  goo-d  to  souls  like  that  of  the  Samaritan 
woman.  Like  their  Master,  they  must  be  careful  about  times 
and  hours,  and  specially  if  they  work  alone.  If  a  man  will  try 
to  do  good  to  a  person  like  the  Samaritan  woman,  alone  and 
without  witnesses,  let  him  take  heed  that  he  walks  in  his  Mas- 
ter's footsteps,  both  as  to  the  time  of  his  proceedings  as  well  as 
to  the  message  he  delivers. — I  believe  there  was  a  deep  mean- 
ing in  the  little  sentence,  "  it  was  about  the  sixth  hour." 

Augustine  thinks  that  "the  sixth  hour"  here  was  meant  to 
represent,  allegorically,  the  sixth  age  of  the  world.  He  says 
that  the  first  hour  was  from  Adam  to  Noah,  the  second  from 
Noah  to  Abraham,  the  third. from  Abraham  to  David,  the  fcurth 
from  David  to  the  Babylonian  captivity,  the  fifth  fronr.  the  cap- 
tivity to  the  baptism  of  John,  and  the  sixth  the  time  of  the  Lord 
Jesus.  I  can  see  no  foundation  lor  these  things  in  the  text.  If 
such  interpretations  of  Scripture  are  correct,  it  is  easy  to  make 
the  Bible  mean  anything 


201 


JOKN"  lY.  7—26. 


T  There  ccmeth  a  woman  of  Sa- 
maria to  draw  water:  Jesus  saith 
unto  her,  Give  me  to  drink. 

8  (For  his  disciples  were  gone 
away  unto  the  city  to  buy  meat.) 

9  Then  saith  the  woman  of  Sa- 
maria unto  him,  How  is  it  that 
thou,  being  a  Jew,  askest  drink  of 
me,  which  am  a  woman  of  Samaria  ? 
for  the  Jews  have  no  deaUngs  with 
the  Samaritans. 

10  Jesus  answered  and  said  un- 
to her,  If  thou  knewest  the  gift  of 
God,  and  who  it  is  that  saith  to 
thee.  Give  me  to  drink  ;  thou 
wouldest  have  asked  of  him,  and 
he  would  have  given  thee  living 
water. 

11  The  woman  saith  unto  him. 
Sir,  thou  hast  notliing  to  draw  with, 
and  the  well  is  deep :  from  whence 
then  hast  thou  that  Hving  water  ? 

12  Art  thou  greater  than  our  fa- 
ther Jacob,  which  gave  us  the  well, 
and  drank  thereof  himself,  and  his 
children,  and  Ms  cattle  ? 

13  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto 
her,  Whosoever  drinketh  of  this 
water  shall  thirst  again ; 

14  But  whosoever  drinketh  of 
the  water  that  I  shall  give  him 
shall  never  thirst ;  but  the  water 
that  I  shall  give  him  shall  be  in 
him  a  well  of  water  springing  up 
into  everlasting  hfe. 

15  The  woman  saith  unto  him, 
Sir,  give  me  this  water,  that  I  thirst 
not,  neither  come  hither  to  draw. 


16  Jesus  saith  unto  her.  Go,  call 
thy  husband,  and  come  hither. 

IT  Tlie  woman  answered  and 
said,  I  have  no  husband.  Jesus 
said  unto  her,  Thou  hast  well  said, 
1  have  no  husband : 

18  For  thou  hast  had  five  hus- 
bands ;  and  he  whom  thou  now 
hast  is  not  thy  husband:  in  that 
saidst  thou  truly. 

19  The  woman  saith  unto  him,  Sir, 
I  perceive  that  thou  art  a  prophet. 

20  Our  fathers  worshipped  in 
this  mountain ;  and  ye  say,  that  in 
Jerusalem  is  the  place  where  men 
ought  to  worship. 

21  Jesus  saith  unto  her.  Woman, 
beheve  me,  the  hour  cometh,  when 
ye  shall  neither  in  this  mountain, 
nor  yet  at  Jerusalem,  worship  the 
Father. 

22  Ye  worship  ye  know  not  what . 
we  know  what  we  worship ;  for 
salvation  is  of  the  Jews. 

23  But  the  hour  cometh,  and  now 
is,  when  the  true  worshippers  shall 
worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in 
truth :  for  the  Father  seeketh  such 
to  worship  him. 

24  God  is  8l  Spirit :  and  they  that 
worship  him  must  worship  him  in 
spirit  and  in  truth. 

25  The  woman  saith  unto  him,  I 
know  that  Messias  cometh,  which 
is  called  Christ :  when  he  is  come, 
he  will  tell  us  all  things. 

26  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  I  that 
speak  unto  thee  am  Jie. 


The  history  of  the  Samaritau  woman,  contained  in  these 
verses,  is  one  of  the  most  interesting  and  instructive  pas- 
eages  in  St.  John's  Gospel.  St  John  has  shown  us,  in  the 
case  of  Nicodemus,  how  our  Lord  dealt  with  a  self-right- 
eous formalist.  He  now  shows  us  how  our  Lord  dealt 
with  an  ignorant,  carnal-minded  woman,  whose  moral 
character  was  more  than  ordinarily  bad.     There  are  les- 

9* 


202  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Bons  in  tLe  passage  for  ministers  and  teachers,  which  they 
would  do  well  to  ponder. 

We  should  mark,  firstly,  the  mingled  tact  and  condescen* 
sion  of  Christ  in  dealing  icith  a  careless  sinner. 

Our  Lord  was  sitting  by  Jacob's  well  when  a  woman 
of  Samaria  came  thither  to  draw  water.  At  once  He 
Bays  to  her,  "  Give  me  to  drink."  He  does  not  wait  for 
her  to  speak  to  Him.  He  does  not  begin  by  reproving 
her  sins,  though  He  doubtless  knew  them.  He  opens 
communication  by  asking  a  favour.  He  approaches  the 
woman's  mind  by  the  subject  of  "  water,"  which  was 
naturally  uppermost  in  her  thoughts.  Simple  as  this  re- 
quest may  seem,  it  opened  a  door  to  spiritual  conversation. 
It  threw  a  bridge  across  the  gulf  which  lay  between  her 
and  Him.     It  led  to  the  conversion  of  her  soul. 

Our  Lord's  conduct  in  this  place  should  be  carefully 
remembered  by  all  who  want  to  do  good  to  the  thought- 
less and  spiritually  ignorant.  It  is  vain  to  expect  that 
such  persons  will  voluntarily  come  to  us,  and  begin  to 
seek  knowledge.  We  must  begin  with  them,  and  go 
down  to  them  in  the  spirit  of  courteous  and  friendly 
aggression.  It  is  vain  to  expect  that  such  persons  will 
be  prepared  for  our  instruction,  and  will  at  once  see  and 
acknowledge  the  wisdom  of  all  we  are  doing.  We  must 
go  to  work  wisely.  We  must  study  the  best  avenues  to 
their  hearts,  and  the  most  likely  way  of  arresting  their 
attention.  There  is  a  handle  to  every  mind,  and  our 
chief  aim  must  be  to  get  hold  of  it.  Above  all,  we  must 
be  kind  in  manner,  and  beware  of  showing  that  we  feel 
conscious  of  our  own  superiority.  If  we  let  ignorant 
people  fancy  that  we  think  we  are  doing  them  a  great 
favour  in  talking  to  them  about  religion,  there  is  little 
hope  of  doing  good  to  their  souls. 

We  should  mark,  secondly,  Christ^s  readiness  to  give 
mercies  to  careless  sinners.    He  tells  the  Samaritan  woman 


JOHN,    CHAP.   IV.  203 

that  if  she  had  asked,  "  He  would  have  given  her  living 
water."  He  knew  the  character  of  the  person  before 
Him  perfectly  well.  Yet  He  says,  "If  she  had  asked, 
He  would  have  given," — He  would  have  given  the  living 
water  of  grace,  mercy,  and  peace. 

The  infinite  willingness  of  Christ  to  receive  sinners  ia 
a  golden  truth,  which  ought  to  be  treasured  up  in  our 
hearts,  and  diligently  impressed  on  others.  The  Lord 
Jesus  is  far  more  ready  to  hear  than  we  are  to  pray,  and 
far  more  ready  to  give  favours  than  we  are  to  ask  them. 
All  day  long  He  stretches  out  His  hands  to  the  disobedient 
and  gainsaying.  He  has  thoughts  of  pity  and  compassion 
towards  the  vilest  of  sinners,  even  when  they  have  no 
thoughts  of  Him.  He  stands  waiting  to  bestow  mercy 
and  grace  on  the  worst  and  most  unworthy,  if  they  will 
only  cry  to  Him.  He  will  never  draw  back  from  that 
well-known  promise,  "Ask  and  ye  shall  receive:  seek  and 
ye  shall  find."  The  lost  will  discover  at  the  last  day, 
that  they  had  not  because  they  asked  not. 

We  should  mark,  thirdly,  the  priceless  excellence  of 
Christ's  gifts  whe7i  compared  with  the  things  of  this  loorld. 
Our  Lord  tells  the  Samaritan  woman,  "  He  that  drinketh 
of  this  water  shall  thirst  again,  but  he  that  drinketh  of 
the  water  that  I  shall  give  him  shall  never  thirst." 

The  truth  of  the  principle  here  laid  down  may  be  seen 
on  every  side  by  all  who  are  not  blinded  by  prejudice  or 
love  of  the  world.  Thousands  of  men  have  every  temporal 
good  thing  that  heart  could  Avish,  and  are  yet  weary  and 
dissatisfied.  It  is  now  as  it  was  in  David's  time,—"  There 
be  many  that  say  who  will  show  us  any  good."  (Psalm 
iv.  6.)  Riches,  and  rank,  and  place,  and  power,  and 
learning,  and  amusements,  are  utterly  unable  to  fill  the 
soul,  He  that  only  drinks  of  these  waters  is  sure  to 
thirst  again.  Every  Ahab  finds  a  Naboth's  vineyard  hard  I 
by  his  palace,  and  every  Haman  sees  a  Mordecai  at  the  \ 


204  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

gate.  There  is  no  heart  satisfaction  in  this  world,  until 
♦^^e  believe  on  Christ.  Jesus  alone  can  fill  up  the  empty 
places  of  our  inward  man.  Jesus  alone  can  give  solid, 
lasting,  enduring  happiness.  The  peace  that  He  imparts 
is  a  fountain,  which,  once  set  flowing  within  the  soul, 
flows  on  to  all  eternity.  Its  waters  may  have  their  ebbing 
seasons ;  but  they  are  living  waters,  and  they  shall  never 
be  completely  dried. 

We  should  mark,  fourthly,  the  absolute  necessity  of  con- 
viction  of  sin  before  a  soul  can  be  converted  to  God.  The 
Samaritan  woman  seems  to  have  been  comparatively  un- 
moved until  our  Lord  exposed  her  breach  of  the  seventh 
commandment.  Those  heart-searching  words,  "  Go,  call 
thy  husband,"  appear  to  have  pierced  her  conscience  like 
an  arrow.  From  that  moment,  however  ignorant,  she 
speaks  like  an  earnest,  sincere  inquirer  after  truth.  And 
the  reason  is  evident.  She  felt  that  her  spiritual  disease 
was  discovered.  For  the  first  time  in  her  life  she  saw  her- 
self. 

To  bring  thoughtless  people  to  this  state  of  mind  should 
be  the  principal  aim  of  all  teachers  and  ministers  of  the 
Gospel.  They  should  carefully  copy  their  Master's  ex- 
ample in  this  place.  Till  men  and  women  are  brought 
to  feel  their  sinfulness  and  need,  no  real  good  is  ever  done 
to  their  souls.  Till  a  sinner  sees  himself  as  God  sees  him, 
he  will  continue  careless,  trilling,  and  unmoved.  By  all 
means  we  must  labour  to  convince  the  unconverted  man 
of  sin,  to  prick  his  conscience,  l;0  open  his  eyes,  to  show 
him  himself.  To  this  end  we  must  expound  the  length 
arid  breadth  of  God's  holy  law.  To  this  end  we  must 
cien ounce  every  practice  contrary  to  that  law,  however 
fashionable  and  customary.  This  is  the  only  way  to  do 
good.  Never  does  a  soul  value  the  Gospel  medicine  until 
it  feels  its  disease.  Never  does  a  man  see  any  beauty  in 
C3hri§t  as  a  Saviour,  until  he  discovers  that  he  is  himself 


205 

a  lost  and  ruiued  sinner.  Ignorance  of  sin  is  invariably 
attended  by  neglect  of  Christ. 

We  should  mark,  fifthly,  the  uselessness  of  any  religion 
which  only  consists  of  formality.  The  Samaritan  woman, 
when  awakened  to  spiritual  concern,  started  questions 
about  the  comparative  merits  of  the  Samaritan  and 
Jewish  modes  of  w^orshipping  God.  Our  Lord  tells  her 
that  true  and  acceptable  worship  depends  not  on  the 
place  in  which  it  is  offered,  but  on  the  state  of  the  wor- 
shipper's heart.  He  declares,  "  The  hour  cometh  when 
ye  shall  neither  in  this  place  nor  at  Jerusalem  worship  the 
Father."  He  adds  that  "  the  true  worshippers  shall  wor- 
ship in  spirit  and  in  truth." 

The  principle  contained  in  these  sentences  can  never  be 
loo  strongly  impressed  on  j^rofessing  Christians.  We  are 
all  naturally  inclined  to  make  religion  a  mere  matter  of  out- 
ward forms  and  ceremonies,  and  to  attach  an  excessive 
importance  to  our  own  particular  manner  of  worshipping 
God.  We  must  beware  of  this  spirit,  and  especially  when 
w^e  first  begin  to  think  seriously  about  our  souls.  The  heart 
is  the  principal  thing  in  all  our  approaches  to  God.  "  The 
Lord  looketh  on  the  heart."  (1  Sam.  xvi.  V.)  The  most 
gorgeous  cathedral-service  is  offensive  in  God's  sight,  if  all 
is  gone  through  coldly,  heartlessly,  and  without  grace.  The 
feeblest  gathering  of  three  or  four  poor  believers  in  a  cot- 
tage to  read  the  Bible  and  pray,  is  a  more  acceptable  sight 
to  Him  who  searches  the  heart  than  the  fullest  congregation 
which  is  ever  gathered  in  St.  Peter's  at  Rome. 

We  should  mark,  lastly,  Chrisfs  gracious  willingness  to 
reveal  Simself  to  the  chief  of  sinners.  He  concludes  His 
conversation  with  the  Samaritan  woman  by  telling  her 
openly  and  unreservedly  that  He  is  tho  Saviour  of  the 
world.  "I  that  speak  to  thee,"  He  says,  "am  the  Mes- 
siah." Nowhere  in  all  the  Gospels  do  we  find  our  Lord 
making  such  a  full  avowal  of  His  nature  and  office  as  He 


206  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

does  in  this  place.  And  this  avowal,  be  it  remembered, 
was  made  not  to  learned  Scribes,  or  moral  Pharisees,  but 
to  one  who  up  to  that  day  had  been  an  ignorant,  thought- 
less, and  immoral  person ! 

Dealings  with  sinners,  such  as  these,  form  one  of  the 
grand  peculiarities  of  the  Gospel.  Whatever  a  man's  past 
life  may  have  been,  there  is  hope  and  a  remedy  for  him  in 
Christ.  If  he  is  only  willing  to  hear  Christ's  voice  and 
follow  Him,  Christ  is  willing  to  receive  him  at  once  as  a 
friend,  and  to  bestow  on  him  the  fullest  measure  of  mercy 
and  grace.  The  Samaritan  woman,  the  penitent  thief,  the 
Philip2)ian  jailor,  the  publican  Zacchaeus,  are  all  patterns 
of  Christ's  readiness  to  show  mercy,  and  to  confer  full  and 
immediate  pardons.  It  is  His  glory  that,  like  a  great  phy- 
sician. He  will  undertake  to  cure  those  who  are  apparently 
incurable,  and  that  none  are  too  bad  for  Him  to  love  and 
heal.  Let  these  things  sink  down  into  our  hearts.  What- 
ever else  we  doubt,  let  us  never  doubt  that  Christ's  love 
to  sinners  passeth  knowledge,  and  that  Christ  is  as  willing 
to  receive  as  He  is  almighty  to  save. 

What  are  w^e  ourselves  ?  This  is  the  question,  after  all, 
which  demands  our  attention.  We  may  have  been  up  to 
this  day  careless,  thoughtless,  sinful  as  the  w^oman  whose 
story  we  have  been  reading.  But  yet  there  is  hope.  He 
who  talked  with  the  Samaritan  woman  at  the  well  is  yet 
living  at  God's  right  hand,  and  never  changes.  Let  us 
only  ask,  and  He  will  "  give  us  living  water." 

Notes.    John  IY.  7—26. 

7. — [Then  cometh... woman.. .draw  water.]  The  scarcity  of  water  in 
the  hot  climates  of  the  East  makes  drawing  water  from  the  near- 
est well  an  important  part  of  the  daily  business  of  an  Eastern 
household.  We  learn  from  other  parts  of  Scripture  that  it  was 
a  work  ordinarily  done  by  women.  (G-en.  xxiv.  11.  1  Sam.  ix. 
11.)  A  well  became  naturally  a  common  meeting-place  for  the 
inhabitants  ol  a  neighbourhood,  and  especially  for  the  young 


IV.     ^  207 

people.  (Judges  v.  11.)  The  insinuation,  however,  of  some 
writers,  as  Schottgen,  that  the  Samaritan  woman's  motives  in 
coming  to  the  well  were  possibly  immoral,  seems  destitute  of  any 
foundation.  Bad  as  her  moral  character  evidently  was,  we  have 
no  right  to  heap  upon  her  more  blame  than  is  warranted  by 
facts. 

Augustine  regards  this  woman  as  a  type  of  the  Gentile  Church, 
"  not  now  justified,  but  even  now  at  the  point  to  be  justified." 
I  doubt  whether  we  were  meant  by  the  Holy  Ghost  to  take  thia 
view.  There  is  great  danger  in  adopting  such  allegorical  inter- 
pretations. They  insensibly  draw  away  the  mind  from  the  plain 
lessons  of  Scripture. 

Musculus  remarks  what  a  wonderful  instance  it  is  of  sovereign 
grace,  that  our  Lord  should  turn  away  from  learned  Scribes, 
Pharisees,  and  Priests,  to  converse  with  and  convert  such  a  per- 
son as  this  woman,  to  all  appearance  so  utterly  unworthy  of 
notice.  He  also  observes  how  singularly  our  least  movements 
are  overruled  by  God's  providence.  Like  Eebecca  and  Rachel, 
the  Avoman  came  to  the  well  knowing  nothing  of  the  importance 
of  that  day's  visit  to  her  soul. 

\Je8us  saitli...give  me  to  drinh.']  In  this  simple  request  of  our 
Lord  there  are  four  things  deserving  notice,  (a.)  It  was  a  gra- 
cious act  of  spiritual  aggression  on  a  sinner.  He  did  not  wait 
for  the  woman  to  speak  to  Him,  but  was  the  first  to  begin  con- 
versation. (6..)  It  was  an  act  of  marvellous  condescension.  He 
by  whom  all  things  were  made,  the  Creator  of  fountains,  brooks, 
and  rivers,  is  not  ashamed  to  ask  a  draught  of  water  I'rom  the 
hand  of  one  of  his  sinful  creatures,  (c.)  It  was  an  act  full  of 
wisdom  and  prudence.  He  does  not  at  once  force  religion  on 
the  attention  of  the  woman,  and  rebuke  her  for  her  sins.  He 
begins  with  a  subject  apparently  indifferent,  and  yet  one  of 
which  the  woman's  mind  was  doubtless  fall.  He  asks  her  for 
water,  {d.)  It  was  an  act  fall  of  the  nicest  tact,  and  exhibiting 
perfect  knowledge  of  the  human  mind.  He  asks  a  favour,  and 
puts  Himself  under  an  obligation.  No  hne  of  proceeding,  it  is 
well  known  to  all  wise  people,  would  be  more  likely  to  concihate 
the  woman's  feelings  towards  Him,  and  to  make  her  willing  to 
hear  His  teaching.  Simple  as  the  request  was,  it  contains  prin- 
ciples which  deserve  the  closest  attention  of  all  who  desire  to  do 
good  to  ignorant  and  thoughtless  sinners. 

The  idea  of  Euthymius,  that  our  liovd  pretended  thirst  in  order 
to  introduce  conversation,  is  unworthy  of  notice. — Cyril  thinks 
that  Oar  Lord  intended  to  make  a  practical  protest  against  the 
exclusiveness  of  the  Jews,  by  asking  drink  of  a  Samaritan  wo- 
man, and  to  show  her  that  He  disapproved  the  custom  of  Hia 
nation. 


208  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

8. — [His  disciples...gone...huy  meat]  This  verse  is  an  insfance  of 
our  Lord's  general  rule  not  to  work  a  miracle  in  order  to  supply 
his  own  wants.  He  who  could  feed  five  thousand  with  a  few 
loaves  and  fishes  when  He  willed,  was  content  to  buy  food,  like 
any  other  man. — It  is  an  instance  of  His  lowly-mindedness.  The 
Creator  of  all  things,  though  rich,  for  our  sakes  became  poor. — 
It  ought  to  teach  Christians  that  they  are  not  meant  to  be  so 
spiritual  as  to  neglect  the  management  of  money,  and  a  reason- 
able use  of  it  for  the  supply  of  their  wants.  God  could  feed  His 
children,  as  He  fed  Elijah,  by  a  daily  miracle.  But  He  knows 
it  is  better  for  our  souls,  and  more  likely  to  call  grace  into  exer- 
cise, not  to  feed  them  so,  but  to  make  them  think,  and  use  means. 
There  is  no  real  spirituahty  in  being  careless  about  money. 
Jesus  Himself  allowed  His  disciples  to  "  buy." 

The  word  rendered  "  meat"  means  nothing  more  than  "  food 
or  nourishment,"  and  must  not  be  confined  to  "  flesh."  Out  of 
the  sixteen  places  where  it  is  used  in  the  New  Testament,  there 
is  not  one  where  it  necessarily  signifies  "  flesh."  The  meat  ofier- 
ing  of  the  Old  Testament  consisted  of  nothing  but  flour,  oil,  and 
incense.  (Lev.  ii.  1,  2.)  The  meaning  of  the  word  "  meat,"  in 
tlie  English  language,  has  evidently  changed  since  the  last  revi- 
sion of  the  English  Bible. 

The  whole  verse  is  an  instance  of  one  of  those  short,  paren- 
thetical, explanatory  comments,  which  are  common  in  St.  John's 
Gospel.  Its  object  is  to  explain  the  circumstance  of  our  Lord 
being  alone  at  the  well,  and  the  fact  that  He  did  not  ask  a  dis- 
ciple to  give  Him  water. 

9. — [Then  saith...woman...how  is  it. .a  Jew... Samaria.]  This  ques- 
tion implies  that  the  woman  was  surprised  at  our  Lord  speaking 
to  her.  It  was  an  unexpected  act  of  condescension  on  His  part, 
and  as  such  arrested  her  attention.  Thus  one  point,  at  any  rate, 
was  gained.  It  is  a  great  matter  if  we  can  only  get  a  careless 
sinner  to  give  us  a  quiet  hearing.  We  shall  soon  see  how  our 
Lord  improved  the  opportunity. 

How  the  woman  knew  our  Lord  to  be  a  Jew,  is  matter  of 
conjecture.  Some  think  that  she  knew  it  by  the  dialect  that  He 
spcke.  Some  think  that  she  knew  it  by  the  fringe  upon  His 
dress,  which  he  probably  wore,  in  conformity  to  the  Mosaic  law, 
(Num.  XT  38,  39,)  and  which  the  Samaritans  very  hkely  ne- 
glected. One  thing  is  very  clear.  There  was  nothing  in  our 
Lord's  personal  appearance,  when  He  was  a  man  upon  earth,  to 
distinguish  Him  from  any  other  Jewish  traveller  who  might 
have  been  found  sitting  at  a  well.  There  was  notliing  eccentric 
cr  pecuUar  about  his  dress.     He  looked  hke  other  men. 

I  venture  the  opinion  that  in  the  woman's  question  stress 


JOHN,    CHAP.   IV.  209 

ehould  be  laid  ou  the  word  "  woman."  She  was  not  only  sur- 
prised that  a  J  ewish  man  asked  drink  of  a  Samaritan,  but  also 
that  he  asked  it  of  a  woman. 

[The  Jeivs  have  no  dealings.. .Samaritans^]  This  sentence  is 
generally  thought,  with  much  reason,  to  be  the  explanatory 
comment  of  St.  John,  and  not  the  words  of  the  Samaritan 
woman.  It  certainly  seems  more  natural  to  take  it  so.  The 
sentence  should  then  be  read  as  a  parenthesis.  Calvin  thinks  it 
is  the  woman's  words,  but  his  reasons  are  not  convincing. 

The  enmity  between  the  Jews  and  Samaritans,  here  referred 
to,  no  doubt  originated  in  the  separation  of  the  ten  tr.bes  under 
Jeroboam,  and  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel.  It 
was  exceedingly  increa-ed  after  the  ten  tribes  were  carried  into 
captivity  by  the  Assyrians,  by  the  fact  that  the  Samaritans 
became  mingled  with  foreigners,  whom  the  king  of  Assyria  sent 
to  Samaria  from  Babylon  and  other  places,  and  so  lost  their  right 
to  be  called  pure  Jews.  (2  Kings  xvii.  1,  &c.)  It  was  further 
aggravated  by  the  opposition  which  the  inhabitants  of  Samaria 
made  to  the  re-building  of  Jerusalem,  after  the  return  from  the 
captivity  of  Babylon,  in  the  days  of  Ezra.  (Ezra  iy.  10,  &c.)  In 
the  days  of  our  Lord  the  Jews  seem  to  have  gone  into  the 
extreme  of  regarding  the  Samaritans  as  entirely  foreigners,  and 
aliens  from  the  commonwealth  of  Israel.  When  they  told  our 
Lord  that  He  was  "  a  Samaritan  and  had  a  devil,"  they  meant 
the  expression  to  convey  the  bitterest  scorn  and  reproach.  (John 
viii.  48.)  It  is  clear,  however,  from  the  conversation  in  th's 
chapter,  that  the  Samaritans,  however  mistaken  on  many  points, 
were  not  ignorant  heathens.  They  regarded  themselves  as 
descended  from  Jacob.  They  had  a  kind  of  Old  Testament  reli- 
gion.    They  expected  the  coming  of  Messias. 

The  bitter  and  exclusive  spirit  of  the  Jews  towards  all  other 
nations,  referred  to  in  this  verse,  is  curiously  confirmed  by  the 
language  used  about  the  Jews  by  heathen  writers  at  Eome. 
Exclusiveness  was  noted  as  one  among  their  pecuHarities. — The 
immense  difficulty  with  which  even  the  apostles  got  over  this 
exclusive  feehng,  and  went  forth  to  preach  to  the  G-entiles,  is 
noticeable  both  in  the  Acts  and  Epistles.  (Acts  x.  28;  xi  2  ; 
Gal.  ii.  12 ;  1  Thess.  ii.  16.) 

The  uttrr  absence  of  real  charity  and  love  among  men  in  the 
days  when  our  Lord  was  upon  earth,  ought  not  to  be  overlooked. 
Well  would  it  be  if  men  had  never  quarrelled  about  religio.i 
after  He  left  the  world !  Quarrels  among  the  crew  of  a  sinking 
ship  are  not  more  hideous,  unseemly,  and  irrational  than  the 
majority  of  quarrels  among  professors  of  religion.  An  historian 
night  truly  apply  St.  John's  words  to  many  a  period  in  Church 
history,  and  say,    "  The   Romanists  have  no  dealings  with  tha 


210  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Proi.estants," — or  "the  Lutherans  have  no  dealings  with  the 
Calvinists," — or  "  the  Calvinists  have  no  deahngs  with  the 
Arminians," — or  "  the  Episcopahans  have  no  deahngs  with  the 
Presbyterians,'' — or  "  the  Baptists  have  no  deahngs  with  those 
who  baptize  mfants," — or  "  the  Plymouth  Brethren  have  no 
deahngs  with  anybody  who  does  not  join  their  company."  "  These 
things  ought  not  so  to  be.  They  are  the  scandal  of  Christianity, 
the  joy  of  the  devil,  and  the  greatest  stumbling-block  to  the 
spread  of  the  Gospel. 

The  Greek  words  translated  "  have  no  dealings,"  mean  literally 
*'use  not  anything  together  with"  the  Samaritans  Pearce  says, 
"  The  Jews  would  not  eat  or  drink  with  the  Samaritans,  would 
not  drink  out  of  the  same  cup,  or  eat  of  the  same  dish  with 
them."  This  fact  throws  much  light  on  the  woman's  surprise  at 
our  Lord's  request,  "  Give  me  to  drink." 

10. — [Jesus  answered,  &c.]  In  this  verse  our  Lord  proceeds  to  uso 
the  opportunity  which  the  woman's  question  affords  Him.  He 
passes  over  for  the  present  her  expression  of  surprise  at  a  Jew 
speaking  to  a  Samaritan.  He  begins  by  exciting  her  curiosity 
and  raising  her  expectations,  by  speaking  of  something  within 
her  reach  which  He  calls  "  living  water."  The  first  step  to  take 
with  a  careless  sinner  after  his  attention  has  been  arrested,  is  to 
produce  on  his  mind  the  impression  that  we  can  teU  him  of 
something  to  his  advantage  within  his  reach.  Tliere  is  a  certain 
vagueness  in  our  Lord's  words  which  exhibit  His  consummate 
wisdom.  A  systematic  statement  of  doctrinal  truth  would  have 
been  thrown  away  at  this  stage  of  the  woman's  feeUng.  The 
general  and  figurative  language  which  our  Lord  employed,  was 
exactly  calculated  to  arouse  her  imagination,  and  to  lead  her  on 
to  further  inquiry. 

[The  gift  of  God.]  This  expression  is  variously  explained. 
Some  think,  as  Augustine,  Rupertus,  Jansenius,  Whitby,  and 
Alford,  that  it  means  "  the  Holy  Spirit,"  that  pecuhar  gift  which 
it  was  the  Messiah's  special  office  to  impart  to  men  in  greater 
abundance  than  it  had  before  been  imparted.  (Acts  ii.  38;  x.  45.) 

Some  think,  as  Brentius,  Bucer,  Musculus,  Calovius,  Grotius, 
and  Barradius,  that  it  means  ''  the  gracious  opportunity  which 
God  is  graciously  giving  to  thee."  If  thou  didst  but  know  what 
a  door  of  life  is  close  to  thee,  thou  wouldst  joyfully  use  it. 

Some  thi ak,  as  Euthymius,  Toletus,  Bulhnger,  Gualter,  Hook- 
er, Beza,  RoUock,  Lightfoot,  Glassius,  Dyke,  Hildersam,  and  Gill, 
that  it  means  "  Christ  Himself,"  God's  gracious  gilt  to  a  sinful 
world.  If  thou  didst  but  know  that  God  has  actually  given  Hia 
only-begoten  Son,  according  to  promise,  and  that  He  has  come 
into  the  world,  and  that  it  is  He  who  is  speaking  to  theq,  thou 
wouldst  at  once  ask  of  Him  hving  water. 


JOHN,    CHAP.    IV.  211 

Some  think  that  it  means  "  God's  gift,  and  especial!}^  His  gift 
of  grace,"  which  is  now  being  proclaimed  and  made  manifest 
to  the  world  by  the  appearing  on  earth  of  His  Son.  (See  Eom. 
V.  15.)  This  seems  to  be  the  view  of  Cyril,  Lampe,  Theophylact, 
Zwingle,  and  Calvin. 

Of  these  four  views  the  last  seems  to  me,  on  the  whole,  the 
most  probable  and  satisfactory.  The  first  sounds  strange  and 
unlike  the  usual  teaching  of  Scripture.  "  If  thou  knewest  the 
Holy  Spirit,  thou  wouldst  have  asked,"  is  an  expression  we  can 
hardly  expect  at  this  period  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  when  the 
mission  of  the  Comforter  had  not  yet  been  explained. — The 
second  view  seems  hardly  more  natural  than  the  first. — Th3 
third  view  is  undoubtedly  recommended  by  the  fact  that  Christ 
is  frequently  spoken  of  as  God's  great  gift  to  the  world.  If 
the  woman  had  really  known  anything  aright  about  Messiah, 
and  had  known  that  He  was  before  her,  she  would  have  asked  of 
Him  living  water.  Nevertheless,  it  is  a  strong  objection  to 
this  view,  that  it  makes  our  Lord  apparently  say  the  same  thing 
twice  over.  "  If  thou  knewest  Christ,  and  that  it  is  Christ  who 
speaks." 

The  last  view  makes  the  first  clause  general,  "  If  thou  knewest 
the  grace  of  God,"  and  the  second  particular,  "  If  thou  also 
knewest  that  the  Saviour  Himself  was  with  thee.''  Thus  both 
clauses  receive  a  meaning. 

[Living  water.']  The  meaning  of  this  expression,  like  "the 
gift  of  God,"  is  variously  explained.  Some,  as  Calovius  and 
Chemnitius,  seem  to  think  it  means  the  doctrine  of  God's  mercy, 
pardon,  cleansing,  and  justification.  Others,  as  Chrysostom, 
Augustine,  Cyril,  Theophylact,  Calvin,  Beza,  Gualter,  Musculus, 
and  Ferus,  think  it  means  the  Holy  Spirit,  renewing,  and 
sanctification. 

I  doubt  whether  either  view  is  quite  correct.  I  am  inclined, 
with  Bullinger  and  Rollock,  to  regard  the  expression  as  a  general 
figurative  description  of  everything  which  it  is  Christ's  office  to 
bestow  on  the  soul  of  man, — pardon,  peace,  mercy,  grace,  justi- 
fication, and  sanctification.  As  water  is  cleansing,  purifying, 
cooling,  refreshing,  thirtt-satisfying  to  man's  body,  so  are  Christ's 
gifts  to  thei  soul.  I  think  everything  that  a  sinful  soul  needs  is 
purposely  included  under  the  general  words,  "  living  water."  It 
comprises  not  only  the  justifying  "  blood  which  cleanses  from  all 
sin,"  but  the  sanctifying  grace  of  the  Spirit,  by  which  we 
"  cleanse  ourselves  from  all  filthiness,"— not  only  the  inward 
peace  which  is  the  result  of  pardon,  but  the  sense  of  inward 
comfort,  which  is  the  companion  of  renewal  of  hearts. 

The  idea  of  "  water,"  we  should  remember,  is  specially  brought 
forward  in  some  of  the  Old  Testamert  promises  of  good  things 


212  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

to  come.  (S<3e  Isai.  xii.  3 ;  xliv.  3 ;  Ezek.  xlvii.  1,  &c. ;  Zech.  xiii. 
1 ;  xiv.  8.)  A  sprinkling  of  clean  water  was  particularly  men- 
tioned as  one  of  the  things  Messiah  was  to  give.  (Isai.  lii.  15 ; 
Ezek.  xxxvi.  25.)  To  an  intelligent  reader  of  the  Old  Testament 
the  mention  of  "  living  water,"  would  at  once  raise  up  the  idea 
of  Messiah's  times. 

The  word  "living,"  applied  here  to  water,  must  not  be  pressed 
too  far.  It  does  not  necessarily  mean  anything  more  than  fresh, 
running  waters.  Thus  it  is  said  that  Isaac's  servant  "found  a 
well  of  living  waters."  (G-en.  xxvi,  19.  See  also  Num.  xix.  17; 
Gant.  iv,  15.)  There  was  undoubtedly  a  deep  meaning  in  our 
Lord's  words,  and  a  tacit  reference  to  the  verse  in  Jeremiah, 
where  God  speaks  of  Himself  as  "  the  fountain  of  living  waters." 
(Jer.  ii.  13.)  Nevertheless,  the  first  idea  that  the  words  would 
convey  to  the  woman's  mind,  would  probably  be  no  more  than 
this,  that  he  who  sat  before  her  had  better,  fresher,  and  more 
valuable  water  than  that  of  the  well.  The  fact  is,  that  our  Lord 
purposely  used  a  figurative,  general  expression,  in  order  to  lead 
the  woman's  mind  gently  on.  If  He  had  said,  "  He  would  have 
given  thee  grace  and  mercy,"  she  would  have  been  unprepared 
for  such  purely  doctrinal  language,  and  it  would  have  called  forth 
prejudice  and  dislike. 

There  is  a  vast  quantity  of  deep  truth  contained  in  this  verse. 
It  is  rich  in  first  principles,  linked  together  in  a  most  instructive 
chain.  (1.)  Christ  has  living  water  to  give  to  men.  (2.)  If  men 
would  only  ask,  Christ  would  at  once  give.  (3.)  Men  do  not 
ask  because  they  are  ignorant. — The  verse  condemns  all  who 
die  unpardoned.  They  have  not  because  they  ask  not.  They 
ask  not  because  they  are  blind  to  their  condition.  To  remove 
this  blindness  and  ignorance  must  be  the  first  object  we  should 


The  notion  of  Ambrose,  Cyprian,  and  Rupertus,  that  "  living 
water"  here  means  baptism,  is  too  monstrous  to  require  refuta- 
tion. It  is  only  a  sample  of  the  preposterous  views  of  some  of 
the  Fathers  and  their  followers  about  the  sacraments. 

Bengel  remarks  on  this  verse  our  Lord's  readiness  to  draw 
lessons  of  spiritual  instruction  from  every  object  near  Him.  To 
the  Jews  desiring  bread,  He  spoke  of  the  bread  of  life.  (John  vi. 
33.)  To  the  people  at  Jerusalem  at  break  of  day.  He  speaks  of 
the  light  of  the  world,  referring  probably  to  the  rising  sun. 
(John  viii.  2,  12.)  To  the  woman  coming  to  draw  water,  He 
speaks  of  living  water. 

U. — [The  woman  saith,  cfx]  The  words  of  the  woman  in  this  and 
the  folk  wing  verse,  imply  surprise,  curiosity,  and  perhaps  a 
slight   sneer.     At  any  rate  tliey  show  that  her  attention  waa 


213 

arrested.  A  stranpre  Jew  at  a  well  suddenly  speaks  to  her  about 
"living  water."  What  could  He  mean?  Was  He  in  earnest  or 
not?     With  a  woman's  curiosity  she  desires  to  know. 

[Sir.]  The  Greek  word  so  rendered  is  generally  translated 
"Lord"  This  leads  some,  as  Chrysost«jm,  to  think,  that  the  wo- 
man's heart  was  so  far  impressed  now,  that  sh^  purposely  used 
a  term  of  respect  and  reverence.  We  must  not,  however,  lay 
too  much  stress  on  the  word.  It  is  certainly  translated  "Sir," 
in  other  places,  where  inferiors  speak  to  superiors  Matt,  xiii 
27;  xxi.  30;  xxvii.  63.  John  iv.  49;  v.  7 ;  xii.  21;  xx.  15. 
Rev,  vii.  14.  Yet  it  is  difficult  to  see  what  other  word  the 
woman  could  have  used  in  addressing  a  strange  man,  without 
rudeness  and  discourtesy. 

[Nothing  to  draw  with.] — The  Greek  expression  here  is  simply 
a  substantive,  meaning  "  an  instrument  for  drawing  water." 
What  it  was  we  are  lefc  to  conjecture.  Schleusner  suggests  from 
Nonnus  that  it  must  mean  a  cup  fastened  to  a  rope. 

[The  well  is  deep.]  These  words,  according  to  the  universal 
testimony  of  travellers  at  this  day,  are  still  literally  true.  The 
well  is  at  least  thirty  yards  deep,  and  to  a  person  not  provided 
with  a  rope,  as  the  woman  doubtless  saw  was  our  Lord's  case, 
the  water  would  be  inaccessible. 

[  Whence  then....that  living  water.]  The  Greek  word  here 
rendered  "  that"  is  simply  the  article  commonly  translated  "  the." 
It  is  like  "  that  prophet."  (John  i.  21.) 

The  ignorance  of  the  woman  in  thinking  of  nothing  but  material 
water,  naturally  strikes  us.  Yet  it  is  nothing  more  than  we  see 
in  many  other  instances  in  the  Gospels.  Nicodemus  could  not  see 
any  but  a  carnal  meaning  in  the  new  birth.  The  disciples  could 
not  understand  our  Lord's  having  "meat  to  eat,"  unless  it  was 
literal  meat.  The  Jews  thought  the  "  bread  from  heaven  "  was 
hteral  bread.  (John  iii.  4  ;  iv.  33  ;  vi.  34.)  The  natural  heart  of 
man  always  tries  to  put  a  carnal  and  material  sense  on  spiritual 
expressions.  Hence  have  arisen  the  greatest  errors  about  the 
sacraments. 
12.—  [Art  thou  greater.]  This  question  exhibits  the  woman's  curiosity 
to  know  who  the  stranger  before  her  could  be.  Who  art  thou 
that  speakest  of  hving  water? — It  also  savours  of  a  sneer  and 
incredulity.  Dost  thou  mean  to  say  that  thou  canst  give  me 
better  and  more  abundant  supplies  of  water,  than  a  well  which 
the  patriarch  Jacob  found  sufficient  for  himself  and  all  his  nume- 
rous company?  Dost  thou  pretend  to  know  of  a  better  well? 
Art  thou,  a  poor  weary  traveller  in  nppearance,  so  great  a  perion 
that  thou  dost  possess  a  better  well  than  Jacob  possessed  ? 

[Our  father  Ja^ob....gave  us  the  well]    Let  it  be  noted  that 


214  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

the  woman  carefully  claimed  relationship  with  Jacob,  and  called 
him  our  father,  though  after  all  the  intermixture  of  the  Samaritan3 
with  heathen  nations,  the  relationship  was  not  very  easy  of  proof. 
But  it  is  common  to  find  people  shutting  their  eyes  to  difficulties, 
when  they  want  to  prove  a  connection  or  relationship.  The 
advocates  of  an  extreme  view  of  apostolical  succession  seldom 
condescend  to  notice  difficulties  when  they  assert  that  episcopally 
ordained  ministers  can  trace  their  order  up  to  the  apostles. 

When  it  says  that  "Jacob  gave"  the  well,  there  is  probably  a 
reference  to  the  grant  which  Jacob  made  to  his  son  Joseph  of 
the  district  near  the  well.  From  Joseph  came  the  tribe  of 
Ephraim,  to  which,  no  doubt,  the  Samaritan  woman  claimed  to 
belong.  (Qen  xlviii.  22.) 

[DrinJcJiimself.... children... .cattle.]  These  words  were  doubt- 
less said  to  show  the  goodness  and  abundance  of  the  water.  Did 
the  stranger  at  the  well  really  mean  to  say  that  he  could  give 
any  better  water  ? 

Bucer  on  this  verse,  remarks  how  the  Samaritans  prided 
themselves  on  their  relationship  to  Jacob,  and  the  possession  of 
his  well,  while  they  made  no  eflfort  to  imitate  his  goodnese,  and 
points  out  the  tendency  of  superstition  to  the  same  thing,  in 
every  age.  "True  piety,"  he  says,  "does  not  consist  in  having 
Jacob's  well  and  Jacob's  land,  but  Jacob's  spirit, — not  in  keeping 
the  bones  of  the  saints,  but  in  imitating  their  lives." 

]3, — [Jesus  answered,  &c.]  In  this  and  the  following  verse  our  Lrrd 
proceeds  to  raise  the  desires  of  the  woman  by  exalting  the  value 
of  the  living  water  of  which  He  had  spoken.  He  still  refrains 
from  distinct  statements  of  doctrinal  truth.  He  still  adheres  to  the 
figurative  expression,  "  water."  And  yet  He  makes  an  advance, 
and  leads  on  the  woman  gently  and  almost  imperceptibly  to 
glorious  spiritual  things.  Now,  for  the  first  time,  He  begins  to 
speak  of  "  everlasting  life." 

[Whosoever  drinketh....this  water.. ..thirst  again.]  It  will  be 
noted,  that  our  Lord  does  not  answer  the  woman's  questions 
directly.  He  keeps  steadily  to  the  one  point  He  desiies  to  fasten 
on  her  mind,  viz.:  the  infinite  excellence  of  a  certain  "living 
water  "  which  He  had  to  give.  And  first  He  reminds  her  of  what 
she  knew  well  by  laborious  experience.  The  water  of  Jacob's 
well  might  be  good  and  plentiful.  But  still  he  who  diank  of  it 
was  only  satisfied  fur  a  few  hours.     He  soon  thirsted  again. 

We  cannot  doubt  that  there  was  a  deep  latent  thought  in  our 
Lord's  words,  in  this  sentence.  He  would  have  us  know  that 
the  waters  of  Jacob's  well  are  typical  of  all  tenjporal  and  materia* 
good  things      They  cannot  satisfy  the  soul.     They  have  no  power 


215 

to  fill  the  heart  of  an  immortal  creature  like  man.     He  who  only 
drinks  of  them  is  sure  to  thirst  again. 

Some  have  thought  that  there  is  a  tacit  reference  in  these  words 
to  the  woman's  insatiable  love  of  sin. 

The  similarity  ought  to  be  noticed  between  our  Lord's  line  of 
argument  in  tbis  verse,  and  the  line  He  adopts  in  recommending 
to  tbe  Jews  the  bread  of  life  in  the  sixth  chapter.  He  showed 
the  Jews  the  superiority  of  the  bread  of  life  over  the  m'anna  by 
the  words  "your  fathers  did  eat  manna,  and  are  dead."  (John  vi. 
49.)  Just  so  in  this  place,  He  shows  the  inferiority  of  the  water 
of  Jacob's  well  to  the  hving  water,  by  saying  "  He  that  drinks 
of  this  water  shall  thirst  again."  The  two  passages  deserve  a 
careful  comparison. 

14. — [  Whosoever  drinJceth.... never  thirst]  These  words  contain  a 
precious  promise,  and  declare  a  glorious  truth  of  the  Go-pel.  The 
benefits  of  Christ's  gifts  are  promised  to  every  one  who  is  willing 
to  receive  them,  whosoever  and  whatsoever  he  may  be.  He  may 
have  been  as  bad  .'is  the  Samaritan  woman.  But  the  promise  Ls 
for  him  as  well  as  for  her,  "whosoever  drinketh,  shall  never 
thirst." — The  declaration  "  shall  never  thirst"  does  not  mean, 
"  shall  never  feel  any  spiritual  want  at  all."  It  simply  asserts  the 
abiding  and  enduring  nature  of  the  benefits  which  Christ  gives. 
He  that  drinks  of  the  living  water  which  Christ  gives,  shall  never 
entirely  and  completely  lose  the  cleansing,  purifying,  and  soul- 
refreshing  effects  which  it  produces. 

Our  English  translation  of  this  sentence  hardly  gives  thb  full 
sense  of  the  G-reek.  Literally  rendered,  it  would  be,  "  shall  never 
thirst  unto  eternity."  The  same  expression  is  used  frequently 
hi  St.  John's  Gospel.  See  John  vi.  51 — 58;  viii.  51;  x.  28;  xi. 
26;  xiv.  16. 

[The  wafer. ...I.... give.. ..well....everlasting  life.']     To  see   the  full 
meaning  of  this  figurative  sentence,  it  must  be  paraphrased.     The 
meaning  seems  to  be  something  of  this  kind.     "  The  gift  of  grace, 
mercy,  and  peace  which  I  am  ready  to  give,  shall  be  in  the  heart 
of  him  who  receives  it  an  everflowing  source  of  comfort,  satis- 
faction, and  spiritual  refreshment,  continuing  and  flowing  on,  not      ^  "^- 
only  through  this  life,  but  unto  life  eternal     He  that  receives   vJ 
my  gift  of  living  water  has  a  fountain  opened  in  his  soul  of  spiritual    \\-^ 
satisfaction,  which  shall  neither  be  dried  up  jn  this  fife  or  the  life  'C^ 
to  come,  but  shall  flow  on  to  all  eternity."   ;_ .  _•  ■ . ,,....  '"'-      ■•■''^''^  v 

Let  it  be  noted  that  the  whole  verse  is  a  strong  argument  ia 
I   fav>;ur  of  the  doctrine  of  the  perpetuity  of  grace,  and  the  consequent 
I  perseverance  in  the  faith  of  behevers.     It  is  ditficult  to  understand 
how  the  Arminian  doctrine  of  the  possibility  of  believers  com 


216  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

pleiely  falling-  away,  and  being  lost,  can  be  reconciled  with  any 
natural  interpretation  of  this  verse. 

Zwingle  thinks,  with  much  probability,  that  the  words  "  a 
fountain  in  him,"  point  to  the  benefits  which  grace  once  received 
makes  a  man  impart  to  others,  as  well  as  enjoy  himself.  See 
John  vii.  38. 

Rollock  remarks  on  this  verse,  "  Let  me  say  in  a  word  what  I 
feel.  "You  will  find  nothing  either  in  heaven  or  in  earth,  with 
which  you  will  be  satisfied  and  feel  supplied,  except  Jesus  Christ 
alone,  with  all  that  fulness  of  the  Godhead  which  dwells  in  Him 
bodily." 

Poole  says,  "  He  who  receiveth  the  Holy  Spirit  and  the  grace 
thereof,  though  he  will  be  daily  saying  give,  give,  and  continually 
desiring  further  supplies  of  grace,  yet  he  shall  never  wholly  want, 
never  want  any  good  thing  that  shall  be  needful  for  him.  The 
seed  of  God  shall  abide  in  him,  and  His  water  shall  be  in  him  a 
spring  supplying  him  until  he  comes  to  heaven." 

15. — [The  woman  saith^  c!:c.]  In  this  verse,  I  think,  we  see  the  first 
sparks  of  good  in  the  woman's  soul.  Our  Lord's  words  aroused 
a  desire  in  her  heart  for  this  living  water  of  which  He  had  spoken. 
She  does  what  our  Lord  said  she  ought  to  have  done  at  first.  She 
"ajiks"  Him  to  give  her  the  water. 

\_Give  me  this  water.. ..that....thirst  not....draw.]  The  motives  of 
the  woman  in  making  this  request  are  variously  explained. 

Some  think,  as  Musculus,  Calvin,  Bucer,  Brentius,  Gualter, 
Lightfoot,  Poole,  and  Dyke,  that  the  request  was  made  in  a 
sarcastic  and  sneering  spirit,  as  though  she  would  say  "  Truly 
this  water  would  be  a  fine  thing,  if  we  could  get  it  1  Give  it  me, 
if  you  have  it  to  give." 

Some  think,  as  Augustine,  Cyril,  Bullinger,  Rollock,  Hilder- 
sam,  Jansenius,  and  Nifanius,  that  the  request  was  only  the  lazy, 
indolent  wish  of  one  who  was  weary  of  this  world's  labour,  and 
yet  could  see  nothing  but  the  things  of  this  world  in  our  Lord's 
sayings,  like  the  request  of  the  Jews,  "  Evermore  give  us  this 
bread."  (John  vi.  34.)  It  is  as  though  she  would  say,  "  Anything  to 
save  me  the  trouble  of  coming  to  draw  water  would  be  a  boon. 
If  you  can  do  that  for  me,  do  it."  As  Bengel  says,  "  She  wished 
to  have  this  living  fountain  at  her  own  house." 

Some  think,  as  Chrysostom,  Theophylact,  and  Euthj'-miui?,  that 
the  request  was  really  the  prayer  of  an  anxious  soul,  aroased  to 
gome  faint  spiritual  desires  by  the  mention  of  eternal  life.  "Hast 
thou  eternal  life  to  bestow  ?     Give  it  to  me." 

I  venture  to  think  that  none  of  these  three  views  is  quite 


217 

correct.  The  true  motive  of  the  request  was  probably  a  vague 
feeling  of  desire  thab  the  woman  herself  could  hardly  have  defined. 
It  is  useless  to  analyze  and  scrutinize  too  closely  the  first  languid 
and  imperfect  desires  that  arise  in  suuls  when  the  Spirit  begins 
His  work  of  conversion.  It  is  folly  to  say  that  the  first  movings 
of  a  heart  towards  Grod  must  be  free  from  all  imperfect  motives 
and  all  mixture  of  infirmity.  The  woman's  motives  in  saying 
*'  Give  me  this  water,"  were  probably  mixed  and  indefinite 
Material  water  was  not  out  of  her  thoughts,  and  yet  she  had 
probably  some  desires  after  everlasting  life.  Enough  for  us. to 
know,  that  she  asked  and  received,  she  sought  and  found.  Our 
great  aim  mu-^t  be  to  persuade  sinners  to  apply  to  Jesus,  and  to 
say  to  Him,  "  Give  me  to  drink."  If  we  forbid  them  to  ask 
anything  until  they  can  prove  that  they  ask  in  a  perfect  spirit,  we 
should  do  no  good  at  all.  It  would  be  as  foolish  to  scrutiinze  the 
grammatical  construction  of  an  infant's  cries,  as  to  analyze  the 
precise  motives  of  a  soul's  first  breathings  after  God.  If  it  breathes 
at  all  and  says,  "  Give,"  we  ought  to  be  thankful. 

16. — [Jesus  saith. ...go... .call. ..hushand... hither.]  This  verse  begins 
an  entirely  new  stage  in  the  history  of  the  woman's  conversion. 
From  this  point  we  hear  no  more  of  "  living  water."  Figurative 
language  is  dropped  entirely.  Our  Lord's  Avords  become  direct, 
personal,  and  plain.  The  woman  had  asked  at  last  for  "  hving 
water."     At  once  our  Lord  proceeds  to  give  it  to  her. 

Our  Lord's  reasons  for  bidding  the  woman  to  call  her  husband, 
have  been  variously  interpreted.  Some  think  that  he  only  meant 
her  to  understand  that  He  had  spoken  long  enough  to  her,  a 
solitary  woman;  and  that  before  He  proceeded  further,  she  must 
call  her  husband  to  be  a  witness  of  the  conversation,  and  to  partake 
of  the  benefits  He  was  going  to  confer.  This  seems  the  view  of 
Chrysostom  and  Theophylact. — Others  think,  with  far  more 
probability,  in  my  judgment,  that  our  Lord's  main  object  in  naming 
the  woman's  husband,  was  to  produce  in  her  mind  conviction  of 
sin,  and  to  show  her  His  own  divine  knowledge  of  all  things.  He 
knew  that  she  had  no  husband,  and  He  purposely  named  him  in  order 
to  touch  her  conscience.  He  always  knew  the  thoughts  of  those 
to  whom  He  spoke  ;  and  He  knew  in  the  presmt  case,  what  the 
effect  of'H'S  words  would  be.  It  would  bring  to  light  the  woman's 
besetting  sin. — It  is  as  though  He  said,  "  Thou  dost  ask  me  for 
living  water.  Thou  dost  at  last  express  a  desire  for  that  great 
spiritual  gift  which  I  am  able  to  bestow.  Well,- then,  I  begin  by 
bidding  thee  know  thyself  and  thy  sinfulness.  I  will  shov/  thee 
that  I  know  thy  spiritual  disease,  and  can  lay  my  finger  on  the 
most  dangerous  ailment  of  thy  soul.  Go,  call  thy  husband,  and 
come  hither." 

Let  it  be  noted  that  the  first  draught  of  living  water  which 
10 


/; 


218  EXPOSITORY    THOUGHTS. 

our  Lord  gave  to  the  Samaritan  woman  was  conviction  of  sin. 
That  fact  is  a  lesson  for  all  who  desire  to  benefit  ignorant  and 
careless  sinners.  The  first  thing  to  be  taught  to  such  persons, 
when  once  we  have  got  their  attention,  is  tlieir  own  sinfulness, 
and  their  cons(^quent  need  of  a  Saviour.  No  one  values  the 
physician  until  he  feels  his  disease. 

Augustine  thinks  that  when  our  Lord  said,  "  Call  thy  hus- 
band," He  meant,  "  Cause  thine  understanding  to  be  forthcom- 
ing. Thy  understanding  is  not  with  thee.  I  am  speaking  after 
the  spirit,  and  thou  nearest  after  the  flesh  !  "  I  can  see  no  wis- 
dom in  this  fanciful  idea. 

1 7. — [The  woman  answered.. .no  husband.']  These  words  were  an 
honest  and  truthful  confession,  so  far  as  they  went.  Whether 
the  woman  wished  it  to  be  supposed  that  she  was  a  widow,  it 
would  perhaps  be  hardly  fair  to  inquire.  Theophylact  and 
Euthymius  suggpst  that  she  did  wish  to  deceive  our  Lord.  The 
way  in  which  our  Lord  receives  her  declaration,  makes  it  proba- 
ble that  she  did  not  profess  to  be  a  widow,  and  very  likely  her 
dress  st.owed  that  she  was  not.  In  this  point  of  view  the  ho- 
nesty of  iier  confession  is  noteworthy.  There  is  always  more 
hope  of  one  who  honestly  and  bluntly  confesses  sin,  than  of  a 
smooth-tongued  hypocrite. 

[Jesus  said.. .thou  hast  well  said...hufihand.']  Our  Lord's  com- 
mendation of  the  woman's  honest  confession  deserves  notice. 
It  teaches  ns  that  we  should  make  the  best  of  an  ignorant  sin- 
ner's words.  An  unskilful  physician  of  souls  would  probably 
have  rebuked  the  woman  sharply  for  her  wickedness,  if  her 
words  led  him  to  suspect  it.  Our  Lord  on  the  contrary  says, 
"  Thou  hast  well  said." 

18. — [Thou  hast  had  Jive  husbands.]  Many  foolish  and  unseemly 
things  have  been  written  about  this  sentence,  which  it  is  not 
worth  while  to  bring  forward.  Of  course  it  is  utterly  improba- 
ble that  the  woman  had  lost  five  husbands  by  death,  and  had 
been  five  times  a  widow.  The  more  likely  explauiition  is  that 
she  had  been  divorced  and  put  away  by  several  husbands  in  suc- 
cession. Divorces  were  notoriously  common  among  the  Jews, 
and  in  all  probability  among  the  Samaritans,  for  very  trivial 
causes.  In  tiie  case,  however,  of  the  woman  before  us,  the 
second  clause  of  the  verse  before  us  makes  it  hkely  that  she  had 
been  justly  divorced  for  adultery. 

Augustine  regards  these  five  husbands  as  significant  of  ''  the 
five  senses  of  the  body,"  which  are  as  five  husbands  by  which 
the  soul  of  the  natural  mar,  is  ruled  1  I  cannot  think  oua-t  our 
Lord  m  ant  anything  of  the  kind. — Euthymius  mentioixr,  another 
allegoricjil  view,  making  the  woman  to  typify  human  nature,  and 


JOHN,    CHAP.    IV.  219 

the  five  husbands  five  different  dispensations,  and  him  with 
whom  she  now  lived  the  Mosaic  Law  I  This  seems  to  me  simply- 
absurd.  Origen  says  much  the  same.  It  is  well  to  know  what 
patristic  interpretation  is  I 

[He  luhom... hast. .not  thy  husband.']  These  words  show  plainly 
that  the  Samaritan  woman  was  living  in  adultery  up  to  the  very 
day  when  our  Lord  spoke  to  her. 

Our  Lord's  perfect  knowledge  of  the  woman's  past  and  present 
life  is  very  noteworthy.  It  ought  ti  remind  us  how  perfectly 
He  is  acquainted  with  every  transaction  of  our  own  lives.  From 
Him  no  secrets  are  hid. 

[In  that  saidst  thou  truly.]  There  is  a  kindness  very  worthy 
of  notice  in  these  words.  Wicked  and  abandoned  as  this  Sama- 
ritan woman  was,  our  Lord  deals  gently  and  kindly  with  her, 
and  twice  in  one  breath  commends  her  confession:  "  Thou  hast 
well  said. — In  that  thou  saidst  truly."  Kindness  of  manner  like 
this  will  always  be  found  a  mo-it  important  point  in  dealing  Avith 
the  ungodly.  Scolding  and  sharp  rebuke,  however  well-deserved, 
have  a  tendency  to  harden  and  shut  up  hearts,  and  to  make 
people  bolt  their  doors.  Kindness,  on  the  contrary,  wins,  softens, 
conciliates,  and  disarms  prejudice.  An  unskilful  soul-i)hysician 
would  probably  have  ended  his  sentence  by  saying,  "  Thou  art 
a  wicked  woman ;  and  if  thou  dost  not  repent,  thou  wilt  be 
lost."  All  this  would  have  been  true  no  doubt.  But  how  dif- 
ferent our  Lord's  grave  and  gentle  remark,  "  Thou  saidst  truly  I" 

19. — [The  ivoman  saith...I  perceive... prophet.]  I  think  we  see  in 
this  verse  a  great  change  in  the  Samaritan  woman's  mind.  She 
evidently  confesses  the  entire  truth  of  what  our  Lord  had  just 
said,  and  turns  to  Him  as  an  anxious  inquirer  about  her  soul.  It 
is  as  though  she  said,  "I  perceive  at  last  that  thou  art  indeed  no 
common  person.  Thou  hast  told  me  what  thou  couldst  not  have 
known,  if  thou  wert  not  a  prophet  sent  from  God.  Thou  hast 
exposed  sins  which  I  cannot  deny,  and  aroused  spiritual  concern 
which  I  would  now  fain  have  reheved.  Now  give  me  instruc- 
tion." 

Let  it  be  noted  that  the  thing  which  first  struck  the  Samaritan 
woman,  and  made  her  call  Jesus  '•  a  prophet,"  was  the  same  that 
struck  Nathanael,  viz.,  our  Lord's  perfect  knowledge. — To  call 
our  Lord  "  a  prophet  "  at  first  sight  may  seem  not  much.  But 
it  must  be  remembe-ed  tljat  even  after  His  resurrection,  the  two 
disciphs  going  to  Emmaus,  only  described  Jesus  as  a  "prophet 
mighty  in  deed  and  word."  (Luke  xxiv.  19.)  A  clear  know- 
ledge of  the  divine  nature  of  Messiah  seems  to  have  been  one 
of  the  points  on  which  almost  the  whole  Jewish  nation  was 
ignorant.    Et  en  the  learned  Scribes  could  not  explain  how  Mes- 


220  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

siah  was  to  be  David's   Lord   and  also    David's    Son.    (Mark 
xii.  37.) 

"20. — [Our  fathers  worshipped,  tfrc.]  To  see  the  full  dtiffc  of  tliia 
ver.-e,  we  must  carefuKy  remember  the  state  of  the  Samaritan 
woman's  mind  at  this  moment.  I  think  that  she  spoke  under 
spiritual  anxiety.  She  was  alarmed  by  having  her  sins  suddenly 
exposed.  She  found  herself  for  the  first  time  in  the  presence  of 
a  prophet.  She  felt  for  the  first  time  the  necessity  of  religion. 
But  at  once  the  old  question  between  the  Jews  and  Samaritans 
aro?e  before  her  mind.  How  was  she  to  know  what  was  truth  ? 
What  was  t^he  to  believe  ?  Her  own  people  said  that  the  Sa- 
maritan mode  of  worshipping  Grod  was  coirect.  The  Jews  said 
that  Jerusalem  was  the  only  pace  where  men  ought  to  worship. 
Between  these  two  conflicting  opinions  what  was  she  to  do  ? 

The  natural  ignorance  of  almost  all  unconverted  people,  when 
first  nr(jused  to  thought  about  religion,  appears  strikingly  in  the 
woman's  words.  Man's  first  idea  is  to  attach  great  importance 
to  the  outward  mode  of  worshipping  God.  The  first  refuge  of 
an  awakened  conscience  is  strict  adherence  to  some  outward 
form,  and  zeal  for  the  external  part  of  religion. 

The  woman's  readiness  to  quote  "  the  fathers  "  and  their  cus- 
toms, is  an  instructive  instance  of  man's  readiness  to  make  cus- 
tom and  tradition  his  only  rule  of  faith.  "  Our  fathers  did  so,"  is 
one  of  the  natural  man's  favourite  arguments.  Calvin's  com- 
ments on  the  expression  "fathers  "  in  this  verse  are  very  useful. 
He  remarks,  among  other  things,  "  None  should  be  reckoned 
Fathers  but  those  who  are  manifestly  the  sons  of  God." 

When  the  woman  spoke  of  "this  mountain,"  she  doubtless 
meant  the  hill  on  which  the  rival  temple  of  Samaria  was  built, 
to  the  bitter  annoyance  of  the  Jerusalem  Jews.  It  is  said  rhat 
this  temple  was  first  built  in  the  days  of  Nehemiah  by  San- 
ballat,  and  that  his  son-in-law,  the  son  of  Joiada,  whom  Nehe- 
miah "  chased  from  him,"  was  its  first  high-priest.  (Neh.  xiii. 
29.)  Some  have  gone  so  far  as  to  maintain  that  the  hill  Gerizim 
at  Samaria  was  the  hill  on  which  Abraham  offered  up  Isaac, 
and  that  the  words  of  the  woman  refer  to  this.  The  more  com- 
mon opinion  is  that  Mount  Moriah  at  Jerusalem  was  the  place. 

When  the  woman  says,  "  Ye  say,"  she  doubtless  includes  th^ 
whole  Jewish  nation,  of  whom  she  regards  our  Lord  as  a  repre- 
sentative. 

Musculus,  Baxter,  Scott,  and  Barnes,  think  that  tlie  woman, 
in  this  verse,  desired  to  turn  away  the  conversation  from  her 
own  sins  to  a  subject  of  pubhc  controversy,  and  in  this  way  to 
change  the  subject.  I  am  not  however  sati-fied  that  this  view 
is  correct.     I  prefer  the  view  of  Brentius,  which  I  have  already 


JOHN,    CHAP.    IV.  221 

set  forth,  that  she  was  truly  impres-ed  by  oar  Lord's  exposure 
of  her  wickedness,  and  made  a  serious  inquiry  about  the  things 
needfal  to  salvatioc .  She  was  aroused  to  seriousness,  and  asked 
what  was  true  religion.  Her  own  nation  said  one  thing.  The 
Jews  said  another.  What  was  truth  ?  In  short,  her  words 
were  only  another  form  of  the  jailor's  question,  "  What  shall  I 
do  to  be  taved?" 

21. — [Jesus  saith,  Woman,  believe  me.]  The  calmness,  gravity,  and 
solemnity  of  these  opening  words  are  very  noteworthy.  "I  tell 
you  a  great  truth,  which  I  ask  you  to  credit  and  believe." 

Jansenius  thinks  that  our  Lord  uses  the  expression  "  beliere 
me,"  because  the  truth  he  was  about  to  impart  was  so  new  and 
strange,  that  the  vroman  would  be  apt  to  think  it  incredible. 

Stier  remarks  that  this  is  the  only  time  our  Lord  ever  uses 
this  expression  "  believe  me  "  in  the  Gospels. 

[The  hour  cometh.]  The  hour,  or  time  here  spoken  of,  means 
the  time  of  the  Gospel,  the  hour  of  the  Christian  dispensation. 

[Ye  shall  neither... this  mounfain... Jerusalem.. .worship,  &ci\  Our 
Lord  here  declares  that  under  the  Gospel  there  was  to  be  no 
more  distinction  of  places  like  Jerusalem.  The  old  dispensation 
under  which  men  were  bound  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem  three  times 
a  year,  to  attend  the  feasts  and  worship  in  the  temple,  was  about 
to  pass  away.  All  questions  about  the  superior  sanctity  of  Sa- 
maria or  Jerusalem  would  soon  be  at  an  end.  A  church  was 
about  to  be  founded,  whose  members  would  find  access  to  the 
Father  everywhere,  and  would  need  no  temple-service,  and  no 
priests  or  sacrifices  or  altars  in  order  to  approach  God.  Ir  was 
therefore  mere  waste  of  time  to  be  disputing  about  the  compara- 
tive claims  of  either  Samaria  or  Jerusalem.  Under  the  Gospel 
all  places  would  soon  be  alike. 

It  seems  far  from  imp:^obable  that  our  Lord  referred  in  this 
verse  to  the  prophecy  of  Malachi,  "In  every  place  incense  shall 
be  offered  to  my  name."  (Mai.  i.  11.) 

The  utter  passing  away  of  the  whole  Jewish  system  seems 
clearly  pointed  at  in  this  verse.  To  bring  into  the  Christian 
Church  holy  places,  sanctuaries,  altars,  priests,  sacrifices,  gorgeous 
vestments,  and  the  like,  is  to  dig  up  that  which  has  been  long 
buried,  and  to  turn  to  candles  for  light  under  the  noon-day  sun. 
The  favourite  theory  of  the  Irvingites  that  we  ought  as  far  aa 
possible  ir.  our  public  worship,  to  copy  the  Jewish  temple  ser- 
vices and  3eremonial,  seems  incapable  of  reconciUation  with  this 
verse. 

Calvin  says,  "  By  calling  God  the  Father  in  this  verse,  Christ 
seems  indirectly  tc  contrast  Him  with  the  '  fathers'  whom  the 


222  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

woman  had  mentioned,  and  to  convey  this  instruction,  that  God 
will  be  a  common  Father  to  all,  so  that  He  will  be  generally 
worshipped  without  distinction  of  place  or  nation." 

22.  — [Ye  ivorship...know  not  what]  In  this  verse  our  Lord  unhesi- 
tatingly condemns  the  religious  system  of  the  Samaritans,  aa 
compared  with  that  of  the  Jews.  The  Samaritans  could  show 
no  Scriptural  authorit}^  no  revelation  of  God,  commanding  and 
sanctioning  their  worship.  Whatever  it  was,  it  was  purely  an 
invention  of  man,  which  Grod  had  never  formally  authorized  or 
accredited.  They  had  no  warrant  for  belie\  ng  that  it  was 
accepted.  They  had  no  right  to  feel  sure  that  their  prayers, 
praises,  and  ofi'erings  were  received.  In  short,  all  was  uncer- 
tainty. They  were  practically  worshipping  an  "unknown 
God." 

Mede  remarks  that  the  Samaritan  woman  overlooked  the 
object  of  worship  in  her  question  about  the  place.  "  You  inquire 
concerning  the  place  of  worshipping.  But  a  far  more  important 
question  is  at  issue  between  us,  viz.,  the  Being  to  be  worshipped, 
respecting  whom  you  are  ignorant." 

[We  know  what  we  tuorship.]  In  contrast  to  the  Samaritan 
rehgious  system,  our  Lord  declares  that  the  Jews  at  any  rate 
could  show  divine  warrant  and  Scriptural  authority  for  all  they 
did  in  their  religion.  They  could  render  a  reason  of  their  hope. 
They  knew  whom  they  approached  in  their  religious  services. 

[Sdvation  is  of  the  Jews.]  Our  Lord  here  declares  that  God's 
promises  of  a  Saviour  and  Redeemer  specially  belong  to  the 
Jerusalem  Jews.  They  were  the  descendants  of  the  tribe  of 
Judah,  and  to  them  belonged  the  house  and  hneage  of  David. 
On  this  point  at  any  rate  the  Samaritans  had  no  right  whatever 
to  claim  equahty  with 'the  Jews.  Granting  that  the  Sama -itans 
had  any  ri.^ht  to  be  called  Israelites,  they  were  of  the  tribe  of 
Ephraim,  from  which  it  was  nowhere  said  that  Messiah  should 
spring.  And  in  troth  the  Samaritans  were  of  such  mixed  origin, 
that  they  had  no  right  to  be  called  Israehtes  at  all. 

I  believe  with  Olshausen,  that  "  salvation,"  in  this  verse,  was 
really  intended  to  mean  "  the  Saviour"  Himself.  The  use  of 
the  article  in  the  Greek  is  striking.  It  is  literally  "  the  salva- 
tion." Does  not  the  saying  to  Zacchaeus  point  the  same  way? 
"  This  day  is  salvation  come  to  this  house."    (Luke  xix.  9.) 

The  expression  "  we"  in  this  verse  is  very  interesting.  It  is 
a  wonderf  \\  instance  of  our  Lord's  condescension,  and  one  that 
stands  almost  alone.  He  was  pleased  to  s-ieak  of  Himself,  just 
in  the  light  that  He  appeared  to  the  woman,  as  one  of  the  Jew- 
ish nation.     "  I  and  all  other  Jews  know  w^hat  we  worship." 

Tlie  folly  of  supposing  that  ignorance  i"  to  be  praised  and 


JOHN,    CHAP.    TV.  223 

commei  ded  in  religion,  as  the  mother  of  devotion,  is  strongly 
condemned  in  this  verse.  Christ  would  have  Christians  "  know 
what  they  worship." 

The  testimony  borne  to  the  general  truth  of  the  religious  sys- 
tem of  the  Jews  in  this  place  is  very  striking.  Corrupt  and 
wicked  as  Scribes  and  Pharisees  were,  Jesus  declares  that  the 
Jewish  religion  was  true  and  Scriptural.  It  is  a  mournful  proof 
that  a  church  may  retain  a  sound  creed,  and  yet  be  on  the  high 
road  to  destruction. 

Hildersam  has  along  note  which  is  well  worth  reading  on  the 
words  "  salvation  is  of  the  Jews."  Considering  the  times  in 
which  he  lived,  it  shows  singularly  clear  views  of  God's  con- 
tinual purposes  concerning  the  Jewish  nation.  He  sees  in  the 
words  the  great  truth  that  all  God's  revelations  to  man  in  every 
age  have  been  made  through  the  Jews. 

23. — [The  hour  cometh  and  now  is.]  These  words  mean  that  the 
times  of  the  Gospel  approach,  and  indeed  have  already  begun. 
*'  They  have  begun  by  the  preaching  of  the  kingdom  of  God. 
They  will  be  fully  brought  in  by  my  death  and  ascension,  and 
the  estabhshment  of  the  New  Testament  church." 

[T>'ue  luorshippers  ..worship. ..spirit  and.. .truth.]  Our  Lord  here 
declares  who  alone  would  be  considered  true  worshippers  in  the 
coming  dispensation  of  the  Gospel.  They  would  not  be  merely 
those  who  worshipped  in  this  place  or  in  that  place.  They 
w^ould  not  be  exclusively  Jews,  or  exclusively  Gentiles,  or  exclu- 
sively Samaritans.  The  external  part  of  the  worship  would  be 
of  no  value  compared  to  the  internal  state  of  the  worshippers. 
They  only  would  be  counted  true  worshippers  who  worshipped 
in  spirit  and  in  truth. 

The  words  "in  spirit  and  in  truth"  are  variously  interpreted, 
and  much  has  been  written  about  them,  I  believe  the  simplest 
explanation  to  be  this.  The  wprd  "  spirit"  must  not  be  taken 
to  mean  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  the  intellectual  or  mental  part  of 
man  in  contradistinction  to  the  material  or  carnal  part  of  man. 
This  distinction  is  clearly  marked  in  1  Cor.  vii.  34,  "Holy  in 
body  and  in  spirit." — "  Worship  in  spirit"  is  heart-worship  in 
contradistinction  to  all  formal,  material,  carnal  worship,  consist- 
ing only  of  ceremonies,  ofFeiings,  sacrifices,  and  the  like.  When 
a  Jew  offered  a  formal  meat-ofiering,  with  his  heart  far  away, 
it  was  worship  after  the  flesh.  When  David  offered  in  prayer 
a  bioken  and  a  contrite  heart,  it  was  worship  in  spirit. — "  Wor- 
ship in  truth,"  means  worship  through  the  one  true  way  of 
access  to  God,  without  the  medium  of  the  sacrifices  or  priest- 
li0(^d,  which  were  ordained  till  Christ  died  on  the  cross.  When 
the  veil  was  '-ent,  and  the  way  into  the  holiest  made  manifest  by 


224  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Christ's  deafb,  then,  and  not  till  then,  men  "worshipped  in 
truth."  Before  Christ,  they  worshipped  throush  types,  and 
shadows,  and  figures,  and  emblems.  After  Christ  they  wor- 
shipped in  truth. — Spirit  is  opposed  to  "  flesh  ;"  truth  to  *'  sha- 
dow." "  Spirit,"  in  short,  is  heart-service,  contrasted  with  lip 
worship  and  formal  devotion.  "  Truth"  is  the  full  light  of  the 
Christian  dispensation  contrasted  with  the  twilight  of  the  law  cf 
Moses. 

The  view  I  have  endeavoured  to  give  is  substantially  that  of 
Chrysoatom  and  Euthymius. 

Caryl,  quoted  by  Ford,  says,  "In  spirit  regards  the  inward 
power,  in  truth  the  outward  form.  The  first  strikes  at  hypocrisy, 
the  second  at  idolatry." 

[^TJie  Father  seeTceth  such...ivorsMp  him.']  This  is  a  remarkable 
sentence.  I  believe  it  to  mean  that  "  the  hour  is  come,  in  which 
the  Father  has  ordained  from  eternity  that  He  will  gather  out 
of  the  world  a  company  of  true  and  spiritual  worshippers.  He 
is  even  now  seeking  out  and  gathering  in  such  worshippers." — 
The  expression  "  seeketh"  is  peculiar.  There  is  something  like 
it  in  the  sentence,  ''  The  Son  of  man  is  come  to  seeh  and  to 
save  that  which  is  lost."  (Luke  xix.  10.)  It  seems  to  show 
the  exceeding  compassion  of  the  Father,  and  His  infinite  will- 
ingness to  save  souls.  He  does  not/merely  wait  for  men  to 
come  to  Him.  He  ''seeks"  for  them. — It  also  shows  the  wide 
opening  of  God  the  Father's  mercy  under  the  Grospel.  He  no 
longer  confines  His  grace  to  the  Jews.  He  now  seeks  and  de- 
sires to  gather  in  everywhere  true  worshippers  out  of  every 
ration. 

The  clause  appears  to  me  specially  intended  to  encourage  the 
Samaritan  woman.  Let  her  not  trouble  herself  with  difficulties 
about  the  comparative  claims  of  the  Samaritan  and  Jewish  sys- 
tems. Was  she  willing  to  be  a  spiritual  worshipper  ?  That  was 
the  one  question  which  deserved  her  attention. 

Trapp  observes,  "  How  should  this  fire  up  our  hearts  to  spiri- 
tual worship  !     That  God  seeks  for  such  worshippers  I" 

24. — [God  is  a  Spirit.]  Our  Lord  here  declares  to  the  Samaritan 
woman  the  true  nature  of  God.  Let  her  cease  to  think  that  God 
was  such  an  one  as  man,  and  that  He  couLl  not  be  found,  or 
approached,  or  addressed,  like  a  mere  earthly  monarch,  except  at 
one  particular  place.  Let  her  leain  to  have  higher,  nobler,  and 
more  exalted  views  of  the  Being  with  whom  smners  have  to  do. 
Let  her  know  this  day  that  God  was  a  Spirit. 

The  declaration  before  us  is  one  of  the  most  lofty  and  definite 
sayings  about  God's  nature  which  is  to  be  found  in  the  whole 


225 

Bible.  That  such  a  declaration  should  have  been  made  to  such 
a  person  as  the  Sainaiitaii  woman  is  awonde;fal  instance  of 
Christ's  condescension!  To  define  precisely  the  full  nieaninjj  of 
the  expression  is  past  man's  understanding.  The  leading  idea 
most  probably  is,  that  "God  is  an  immaterial  being,  that  He 
dwelleth  not  in  temples  made  with  hand.<,  and  that  He  is  not,  like 
ourselves,  therefore,  absent  from  one  place  when  He  is  present 
at  anothei-."  These  things  are  all  true,  but  how  little  we  can 
realize  them  1 

Cornelius  d  Lapide  gives  an  excellent  summary  of  the  opinions 
of  heathen  philosophers  on  the  nature  of  God,  in  his  commentary 
on  this  verse. 

[They... .worship. ...mitst...worship... .spirit.... truth.']  Our  Lord 
draws  this  broad  conclusion  from  the  statement  of  God's  nature 
which  He  has  just  made.  If  "  God  is  a  Spirit"  it  behoves  those 
who  M^ould  worship  Him  acceptably,  to  worship  in  spirit  and  in 
truth.  It  is  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  He  can  like  any  wor- 
ship which  does  not  come  from  the  heart,  or  can  be  so  Avell 
pleased  with  worship  which  is  offered  through  types  and  cere- 
monies, as  with  worship  offered  through  the  true  way  which  He 
has  provided,  and  is  now  revealing. 

The  importance  of  the  great  principle  laid  down  in  this  and 
the  preceding  verse,  can  never  be  overrated.  Any  rehgious 
teaching  which  tends  to  depreciate  heart-worship,  and  to  turn 
Christianity  into  a  mere  formal  service,  or  which  tends  to  bring 
back  Jewish  shadows,  ceremonies,  and  services,  and  to  introduce 
them  into  Christian  worship,  is  on  the  face  of  these  remarkable 
verses  most  unscriptural  and  deserving  of  reprobation. 

Of  course  we  must  not  admit  the  idea,  that  in  this  and  the 
preceding  verse.  Jesus  meant  to  pour  contempt  on  the  ceremonial 
law,  which  God  Himself  had  given.  But  He  plainly  teaches  that 
it  was  an  imperfect  dispensation,  given  because  of  man's  igno- 
rance and  infirmity,  as  we  give  pictures  to  children  in  teaching 
them.  It  wa-,  in  fact,  a  schoolmaster  to  Christ.  (Gal.  iii,  24.) 
To  want  men  to  return  to  it  is  as  absurd  as  to  bid  grown  up  peo- 
ple begin  learning  the  alphabet  by  pictures  in  an  infant  school. — 
On  the  other  hand,  as  Beza  remarks,  we  must  not  run  mto  the 
extreme  of  despising  all  ordinances,  sacraments,  and  outward 
ceremonies  in  religion.  The?e  things  have  their  use  and  value, 
however  much  they  may  be  abused. 

25. — [The  ivoman  saitJi,  IJcnow...Messias...  Christ,,  Sc]  This  verse  is 
an  intt're-ting  one.  It  sIjows  the  woman  at  last  brought  to  the 
very  state  of  mind  in  which  she  would  be  prepared  to  welcome 
a  revelation  of  Chiist.  She  had  been  told  of  "  living  water,"  and 
had  expressed  a  desire  for  it.  She  had  been  told  her  own  sin, 
and  had  been  unable  to  deny  it.     She  had  been  told  the  useless- 

10* 


226  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

ness  of  resting  on  any  formal  membership  of  the  Samaritan 
Church,  and  the  necessity  of  spiritual  and  heart-worshiji  of  God. 
And  now  what  can  she  say  ?  It  is  all  trae,  she  feels, — she  cannot 
gainsay  it.  But  what  can  she  do?  To  whom  is  she  to  go? 
Whose  teaching  can  she  follow?  All  she  can  do  is  to  say  that 
"  she  knows  Messias  is  one  day  coming,  and  that  He  will  make 
all  things  clear  and  plain."  It  is  evident  that  she  wishes  for 
Him.  She  is  uncomfortable  and  sees  no  relief  for  her  newly- 
raised  perplexiiles,  unless  Messias  should  appear. 

The  mention  of  Messias  in  this  verse,  makes  it  clear  that  the 
Samaritans  were  not  altogether  ignorant  of  the  Old  Testament, 
and  that  there  was  an  expectation  of  a  Kedeemer  of  some  kind 
among  them,  as  well  as  among  the  Jews.  The  existence  of  a 
general  expectation  of  this  sort  throughout  the  East,  at  the  time 
when  our  Lord  appeared  on  earth,  is  a  fact  to  which  even 
heathen  writers  have  testified. 

When  the  woman  says,  ''  He  will  tell  us  all  things,"  we  must 
probably  not  inquire  too  closely  into  what  she  meant.  It  is  very 
likely  that  she  had  only  a  vague  feeling  that  Messias  would 
remove  all  doubts  and  show  all  things  needful  to  salvation. 

Chrysostom  remarks  on  this  verse,  "The  woman  was  made 
dizzy  by  Christ's  discourse,  and  fainted  at  the  sublimity  of  what 
He  said,  and  in  her  trouble  saith,  I  know  that  Messias  cometh." 

Wordswortli  observes,  that  the  Samaritan  woman  had  a  clearer 
knowledge  of  Messiah's  office  than  the  Jews  generally  showed. 
She  looked  for  Him  as  a  Teacher.  They  looked  for  Him  as 
a  conquering  King. 

Beza  and  A.  Clark  think,  that  the  words,  "which  is  called 
Christ,"  in  this  verse,  are  St.  John's  parenthetical  explanation  of 
the  word  Messias.  It  is  certainly  rather  unlikely  that  the  woman 
would  have  used  them  in  addressing  a  Jew.  Yet  most  commen- 
tators think  that  they  were  her  words. 

26. — [Jesus  saith. ..I...spea7c...am  He.]  These  words  are  the  fullest 
declaration  which  our  Lord  ever  made  of  His  own  Messiahship, 
which  the  Gospel  writers  have  recorded.  That  such  a  full 
declaration  should  be  made  to  such  a  person  as  the  Samaritan 
woman  is  one  of  the  most  wonderful  instances  of  our  Lord's 
grace  and  condescension  related  in  the  New  Testament!  At 
last  the  woman  obtained  an  answer  to  one  of  her  first  questions, 
"Art  thou  greater  than  our  father  Jacob ?  "  When  the  answer 
came  it  completely  converted  her  soul. 

Rollock  remarks  on  this  verse,  how  ready  and  willing  Christ  is 
to  reveal  Himself  to  a  sinner's  soul.  The  very  moment  that  this 
woman  expressed  any  desire  for  Messiah,  He  at  once  revealed 
H-mself  tohe-— "lamHe." 


JOHN,    CHAP.    IV.  227 

Quesnel  observes,  "  It  is  a  great  mistake  to  suppose  that  the 
knowledge  of  the  mysteries  of  religion  ought  not  to  be  imparted 
to  women  by  the  reading  of  Scripture,  considering  this  instance 
of  the  great  confidence  Christ  reposed  in  this  woman  by  His 
manifestation  of  Himself.  The  abuse  of  the  Scriptures  and  the 
sin  of  heresies,  did  not  proceed  from  the  simplicity  of  women, 
but  from  the  conceited  learning  of  men." 

In  leaving  the  whole  passage,  there  are  several  striking  points 
which  ought  never  to  be  forgotten.  («.)  Our  Lord's  mercy  is 
remarkable.  That  such  an  one  as  He  should  deal  so  graciou-ly 
with  such  a  sinner  is  a  striking  fact.  (&.)  Our  Lord's  wisdom  is 
remarkable.  How  wise  was  every  step  of  His  way  in  deahng 
with  this  sinful  soul!  (c.)  Our  Lord's  patience  is  remarkable. 
How  He  bore  with  the  woman's  ignorance,  and  what  trouble  He 
took  to  lead  her  to  knowledge !  (d)  Our  Lord's  power  is  re- 
markable. What  a  complete  victory  He  won  at  last!  How 
almighty  must  that  grace  be  which  could  soften  and  convert  such 
a  carnal  and  wicked  heart! 

We  must  never  despise  any  soul,  after  reading  this  passage. 
Noue  can  be  worse  than  this  woman.  But  Christ  did  not  despise 
her. 

We  must  never  despair  of  any  soul,  after  reading  this  passage. 
If  this  woman  was  converted,  any  one  may  be  converted. 

Finally,  we  must  never  contemn  the  use  of  all  wise  and 
reasonable  means  in  dealing  with  souls.  There  is  a  "  wisdom 
which  is  profitable  to  direct "  in  approaching  ignorant  and  un- 
godly people,  which  must  be  diligently  sought. 


JOHN  lY.  27—30. 


2*1  And  upon  this  came  his  dis- 
ciples, and  marvelled  that  he  talked 
with  the  woman ;  yet  no  man  said, 
What  seekest  thou  ?  or  Why  talk- 
esfc  thou  with  her? 

28  The  woman  then  left  her 
waterpot,     and     went     her     way 


into    the    city,    and    saith  to  the 

men, 

29  Come,  see  a  man,  which  told 
me  all  things  that  ever  I  did:  is 
not  this  the  Christ  ? 

30  Then  they  went  out  of  the 
city,  and  came  unto  him. 


These  verses  continue  the  well-known  story  of  the  Sama- 
ritan woman's  conversion.  Short  as  the  passage  may 
appear,  it  contains  points  of  deep  interest  and  importance. 
The  mere  worldling,  who  cares  nothing  about  experimental 


228  EXPOSITOEY  THOUGHTS. 

religion,  may  see  nothing  particular  in  these  verses.  To 
all  who  desire  to  know  something  of  the  experience  of  a 
converted  person,  they  will  be  found  full  of  food  for 
thought. 

We  see,  firstly,  in  this  passage,  how  marvellous  in  the 
eyes  of  man  are  ChrisVs  dealings  with  soids.  We  are  told 
that  the  disciples  "marvelled  that  he  talked  with  the 
woman."  That  their  Master  should  take  the  trouble  to 
talk  to  a  woman  at  all,  and  to  a  Samaritan  woman,  and  to 
a  strange  woman  at  a  well,  when  He  was  wearied  with 
His  journey, — all  this  was  wonderful  to  the  eleven  disci- 
ples. It  was  a  sort  of  thing  which  they  did  not  expect. 
It  was  contrary  to  their  idea  of  what  a  religious  teacher 
should  do.     It  startled  them  and  filled  them  with  surprise. 

The  feeling  displayed  by  the  disciples  on  this  occasion, 
does  not  stand  alone  in  the  Bible.  When  our  Lord 
allowed  publicans  and  sinners  to  draw  n^ar  to  Him  and  be 
in  His  company,  the  Pharisees  marvelled.  They  exclaimed, 
"  This  man  receiveth  sinners  and  eateth  with  them."  (Luke 
XV.  2.) — When  Saul  came  back  from  Damascus,  a  converted 
man  and  a  new  creature,  the  Christians  at  Jerusalem  were 
astonished.  "  They  believed  not  that  he  wa-s  a  disciple." 
(Acts  ix.  26.) — When  Peter  was  delivered  from  Herod's 
prison  by  an  ajigel,  and  brought  to  the  door  of  the  house 
where  disciples  were  praying  for  his  deliverance,  they  were 
so  taken  by  surprise  that  they  could  not  believe  it  was 
Peter.  "  When  they  saw  him  they  were  astonished." 
(Acts  xii.  16.) 

But  why  should  we  stop  short  in  Bible  instances  ?  The 
true  Christian  has  only  to  look  around  him  in  this  world  iu 
order  to  see  abundant  illustrations  of  the  truth  before  us. 
IIow  much  astonishment  every  fresh  conversion  occasions  I 
What  surprise  is  expressed  at  the  change  in  the  heart,  life, 
tastes,  and  habits  of  the  converted  person  !  What  wonder 
is  felt  at  the  power,  the  mercy,  the  patience,  the  compas- 


JOHN",   CHAP.   IV.  229 

sion  of  Christ !  It  is  now  as  it  was  eighteen  hundred  years 
ago.  The  dealings  of  Christ  are  still  a  marvel  both  to  the 
Church  and  to  the  world. 

If  there  was  more  real  faith  on  the  earth,  there  would 
be  less  surprise  felt  at  the  conversion  of  souls.  If  Chris- 
tians believed  more,  they  would  expect  more,  and  if  they 
understood  Christ  better,  they  would  be  less  startled  and 
astonished  when  He  calls  and  saves  the  chief  of  sinners. 
We  should  consider  nothing  impossible,  and  regard  no 
sinner  as  beyond  the  reach  of  the  grace  of  God.  The 
astonishment  expressed  at  conversions  is  a  proof  of  the 
weak  faith  and  ignorance  of  these  latter  days.  The  thing 
that  ought  to  fill  us  with  surprise  is  the  obstinate  unbelief 
of  the  ungodly,  and  their  determined  perseverance  in  the 
way  to  ruin.  This  was  the  mind  of  Christ.  It  is  written 
that  He  thanked  the  Father  for  conversions.  But  He  mar- 
velled at  unbelief.  (Matt.  xi.  25  ;  Mark  vi.  6.) 

We  see,  secondly,  in  this  passage,  hoio  absorbing  is  the 
influence  of  grace^  when  it  first  comes  into  a  believer's 
heart.  We  are  told  that  after  our  Lord  had  told  the 
woman  He  was  the  Messiah,  "  She  left  her  water-pot  and 
went  her  way  into  the  city,  and  saith  to  the  men.  Come, 
see  a  man  which  told  me  all  things  that  ever  I  did."  She 
had  left  her  home  for  the  express  purpose  of  drawing 
water.  She  had  carried  a  large  vessel  to  the  well,  intend- 
ing to  bring  it  back  filled.  But  she  found  at  the  well  a 
new  heart,  and  new  objects  of  interest.  She  became  a 
new  creature.  Old  things  passed  away.  All  things  be- 
came new.  At  once  everything  else  was  forgotten  for  the 
time.  She  could  think  of  nothing  but  the  truths  she  had 
heard,  and  the  Saviour  she  had  found.  In  the  fulness  of 
her  heart  she  "left  her  water-pot,"  and  hastened  away  to 
express  her  feelings  to  others. 

We  see  here  the  expulsive  power  of  the  grace  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.     Grace  once  introduced  into  the  heart  drives 


230  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS 

out  oUl  tastes  and  interests.  A  converted  person  no  longer 
cares  for  what  he  once  cared  for.  A  new  tenant  is  in  the 
house.  A  new  pilot  is  at  the  helm.  The  whole  world 
looks  different.  All  things  have  become  new.  It  was  so 
with  Matthew  the  publican.  The  moment  that  grace  came 
into  his  heart  he  left  the  receipt  of  custom.  (Matt.  ix.  9.) 
— It  was  so  with  Peter,  James,  and  John,  and  Andrew. 
As  soon  as  they  were  converted  they  forsook  their  nets 
and  fishing-boats.  (Mark  i.  19.) — It  was  so  with  Saul  the 
Pharisee.  As  soon  as  he  became  a  Christian  he  gave  up 
all  his  brilliant  prospects  as  a  Jew,  in  order  to  preach  the 
faith  he  had  once  despised.  (Acts  ix.  20.) — The  conduct 
of  the  Samaritan  woman  was  precisely  of  the  same  kind. 
For  the  time  present  the  salvation  she  had  found  com- 
pletely filled  her  mind.  That  she  never  returned  for 
her  water-pot  would  be  more  than  we  have  a  right 
to  say.  But  under  the  first  impressions  of  new  spiri- 
tual life,  she  went  away  and  "  left  her  water-pot " 
behind. 

Conduct  like  that  here  described  is  doubtless  uncom- 
mon in  the  present  day.  Rarely  do  we  see  a  person  s© 
entirely  taken  up  with  spiritual  matters,  that  attention  to 
this  world's  affairs  is  made  a  secondary  matter,  or  post- 
poned. And  why  is  it  so  ?  Simply  because  true  conver- 
sions to  God  are  uncommon.  Few  really  feel  their  sins, 
and  flee  to  Christ  by  faith.  Few  really  pass  from  death 
to  life,  and  become  new  creatures.  Yet  these  few  are 
the  real  Christians  of  the  world.  These  are  the  people 
whose  religion,  like  the  Samaritan  woman's,  tells  on 
others.  Happy  are  they  who  know  something  by  expe- 
rience of  this  woman's  feelings,  and  can  say  with  Paul, 
*'I  count  all  things  but  loss  for  the  excellency  of  the 
knowledge  of  Christ!"  Happy  are  they  who  have  given 
up  everything  for  Christ's  sake,  or  at  any  rate  have 
altered  the   relative   importance    of    all   things   in   their 


JOHN,    CHAP.    lY.  231 

minds!  "If  thine  eye  be  single  thy  whole  body  shall 
be  full  of  light."   (Philipp.  iii.  8 ;  Matt.  v.  22.) 

We  see,  lastly,  in  this  passage,  how  zealous  a  truly 
converted  person  is  to  do  good  to  others.  We  are  told  that 
the  Saraaritan  woman  "  went  into  the  city,  and  said  to 
the  men,  Come,  see  a  man  which  told  me  all  things 
that  ever  I  did :  is  not  this  the  Christ  ?"  In  the  day 
of  her  conversion  she  became  a  missionary.  She  felt  so 
deeply  the  amazing  benefit  she  had  received  from  Christ, 
that  she  could  not  hold  her  peace  about  Him.  Just  as 
Andrew  told  his  brother  Peter  about  Jesus,  and  Philip 
told  Nathanael  that  he  had  found  Messiah,  and  Saul, 
when  converted,  straightway  preached  Christ,  so,  in  the 
same  w^ay,  the  Samaritan  woman  said,  "Come  and  see 
Christ."  She  used  no  abstruse  arguments.  She  attempted 
no  deep  reasoning  about  our  Lord's  claim  to  be  the  Messiah. 
She  only  said,  "  Come  and  see."  Out  of  the  abundance 
of  her  heart  her  mouth  spoke. 

That  which  the  Samaritan  woman  here  did,  all  true 
Christians  ought  to  do  likewise.  The  Church  needs  it. 
The  state  of  the  world  demands  it.  Common  sense 
points  out  that  it  is  right.  Every  one  who  has  received 
the  grace  of  God,  and  tasted  that  Christ  is  gracious, 
ought  to  find  words  to  testify  of  Christ  to  others.  Where 
is  our  faith,  if  we  believe  that  souls  around  us  are  perish- 
ing, and  that  Christ  alone  can  save  them,  and  yet  hold 
our  peace?  Where  is  our  charity  if  we  can  see  others 
going  down  to  hell,  and  yet  say  nothing  to  them  about 
Christ  and  salvation? — We  may  well  doubt  our  own  love 
to  Christ,  if  our  hearts  are  never  moved  to  speak  of  Him. 
We  may  well  doubt  the  safety  of  our  own  souls,  if  we 
feel  no  concern  about  the  souls  of  others. 

What  are  we  ourselves  ?  This  is  the  question,  after  all, 
which  demands  our  notice.  Do  we  feel  the  supreme 
importance    of    spiritual    things,    and    the    comparativa 


232  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

nothingness  of  the  things  of  the  world  ?  Do  we  ever  talk 
to  others  about  God,  and  Christ,  and  eternity,  and  the 
soul,  and  heaven,  and  hell  ?  If  not,  what  is  the  value  of 
our  faith  ?  Where  is  the  reality  of  our  Christianity  ?  Let 
us  take  heed  lest  we  awake  too  late,  and  find  that  we  are 
lost  for  ever,  a  wonder  to  angels  and  devils,  and,  above  all, 
a  wonder  to  ourselves,  because  of  our  own  obstinate  blind- 
ness and  folly. 

Notes.     John  IV.  27—30. 

27. — [  Upon  this^  The  true  idea  contained  in  this  expression  seems 
to  be,  "At  this  point,  at  this  critical  juncture  in  the  conversation 
between  our  Lord  and  the  woman." — What  the  woman  would 
have  said  next  after  our  Lord's  marvellous  discovery  of  Himself, 
we  are  left  to  conjecture.  But  just  as  our  Lord  said,  ''I  am  the 
Me-siah,"  the  disciples  retnrned  from  buying  food,  and  their 
appearance  stopped  the  conversation.  The  woman's  heart  v/"as 
probably  too  full,  and  her  mind  too  much  excited  to  say  more  in 
the  presence  of  witnesses,  and  especially  of  strangers.  Therefore 
no  more  was  said,  and  she  withdrew.  The  soul,  in  the  beginning 
of  a  work  of  grace,  shrinks  from  discovering  its  workings  before 
strangers. 

[Marvelled...talked  with  the  woman.]  I  am  inclined  tt>  think 
that  these  words  would  have  been  more  correctly  rendered, 
"Talked  with  a  woman."  There  is  no  article  in  "the  original 
Greek.  The  wonder  of  the  disciples  was  excited,  not  so  much 
by  our  Lord  talking  to  this  woman,  as  by  His  talking  to  a  wonrian 
at  a'l.  It  is  clear  from  Rabbinical  writings,  that  thero.  was  a 
common  opinion  among  the  Jews  that  both  in  understanding 
and  religion  women  were  an  inferior  order  of  beings  to  men. 
This  ignorant  prejudice  had  most  likely  leavened  the  minds  of 
the  discipL'S,  and  is  probably  referred  to  in  this  place.  Of  the 
woman's  moral  character  it  is  not  clear  that  the  disciples  could 
know  anything  at  all. 

Rupertus  thinks  that  our  Lord,  by  conversing  openly  with  a 
Samaritan  woman,  wished  to  show  His  disciples  by  an  example, 
that  the  wall  between  Jews  and  other  people  was  to  be  broken 
down  by  the  Gospel,  just  as  He  taught  Peter  the  same  lesson 
afrer  His  ascension,  by  the  vision  of  tho  sheet  full  of  clean  and 
unclean  beasts.  (Acts  x.  11 — 15.)  He  thinks  that,  the  wonder 
of  the  disciples  arose  from  the  same  Jewish  prejudice  against 
intercourse  with  uncircumcised  Gentiles  which  appeared  so 
strongly  in  after  times. 


JOHN,  CHAP.  IV.  233 

Lightfoot,  Schottgen,  and  Tholuck  quote  proverbial  sayings 
from  Rabbinical  writeis,  showing  the  Jewish  feeling  about 
women.  The  following  are  instances — "He  who  instructs  his 
daughter  in  the  law  plays  the  fool."  '•  Do  not  multiply  discourses 
wiih  a  Woman."  "Let  no  one  talk  with  a  woman  in  the  street, 
no  not  with  his  own  wife." — Whitby  also  says,  from  Buxtorf, 
that  the  Rabbins  say  that  ''  talking  with  a  woman  is  one  of  the 
six  things  which  make  a  disciple  impure." 

[JVo  man  said,  What  seekest..why  talkest,  &c.'\  We  are  left  to 
conjecture  M'hether  both  these  questions  apply  to  our  Lord,  cr 
whether  the  first  applied  to  the  woman,  "  What  seekest  thou  of 
Him  ?"  and  the  second  to  our  Lord,  "  Why  talkeso  thou  with 
her  ?"  The  point  is  of  no  particular  importance.  To  me,  how- 
ever, it  appears  that  both  questions  apply  to  Christ. — "  No  man 
said,  'What  art  thou  sacking  from  her?  Why  art  thou  taking 
with  her  ?' " 

Grotius  suggests  that  the  disciples  supposed  our  Lord  might 
have  been  seeking  meat  or  drink  from  the  Samaritan  woman, 
and  meant,  "  Why  seekest  thou  any  meat  or  drink  from  her  ?" 

I  venture  to  doubt  whether  both  questions  had  not  better  have 
been  translated  ahke,  "  What  art  thou  seeking  from  her  ?  What 
art  thou  talking  about  with  her?  "  The  Greek  word  is  the  same 
which  our  translators  have  rendered  "  what "  in  the  first  question, 
and  "  why  "  in  the  second. 

The  expression,  "No  man  said,"  seems  to  imply  that  no  man 
ventured  to  ask  any  question  what  was  our  Lord's  reason  for 
talking  with  the  woman.  It  is  not  very  clear  why  the  sentence 
is  introduced.  The  object  probably  is,  as  Cyril  and  Chrysostom 
remark,  to  show  us  the  deep  reverence  and  respect  with  which 
the  disciples  regarded  our  Lord  and  all  His  actions,  even  at  this 
early  period  of  His  ministry. — It  also  shows  us  that  they  some- 
times thought  things  about  Him  to  which  they  dared  not  give 
expression,  and  saw  deeds  of  His  which  they  could  not  under- 
stand, but  were  content  silently  to  wonder  at  them.  There  is  a 
lesson  for  us  in  their  conduct.  When  we  cannot  understand  the 
reason  of  our  Lord's  dealings  with  souls,  let  us  hold  our  peace,  and 
try  to  beheve  that  there  are  reasons  which  we  shall  know  one 
day.  A  good  servant  in  a  great  house  must  do  his  own  duty, 
and  ask  no  questions.  A  young  student  of  medicine  must  take 
many  things  on  trust. 
28. — [^The  woman.. .left. .ivater-pot]  The  Greek  word  here  rendered 
"  water-pot  "  is  the  same  that  is  used  in  the  account  of  the  miracle 
at  Cana  in  Galilee.  (John  ii.  6.)  It  does  not  mean  a  small  drink- 
ing-vessel,  but  a  large  jar,  such  as  a  woman  in  Eastern  countries 
would  carry  on  her  head.  We  can  therefore  well  understand 
that  if  the  woman  wished  ^d  return  in  haste  to  the  city  she 


234  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

would  leave  her  water-pot.    So  large  a  vessel  could  not  be  carried 
quickly,  whether  empty  or  full. 

The  mind  of  the  woman  in  leaving  her  water-pot  seems  to  mf» 
clear  and  unmistakeable.  She  was  entirely  absorlDed  in  the  things 
which  she  had  heard  from  our  Lord's  mouth.  She  was  anxious 
to  tell  them  without  delay  to  her  friends  and  neighbours.  She 
therefore  postponed  her  business  of  drawing  water,  for  which  she 
had  left  her  house,  as  a  matter  of  secondary  importance,  and 
hurried  off  to  tell  others  what  she  had  been  told.  The  sentence 
is  deeply  instructive. 

Lightfoot  thinks,  beside  this,  that  the  woman  left  her  water-pot 
out  of  kindne-s  to  our  Lord,  "  that  Jesus  and  ITis  disciples  might 
have  wherewithal  to  drink." 

[Went  her  way.,  city.]  The  Greek  word  rendered  "went  her 
way,"  means  simply,  "  departed  "  or  "  went."  The  city  must  of 
course  mean  "  Sychar." 

[Saith  to  the  men.]  We  must  not  suppose  that  the  woman 
spoke  to  th>  men  only,  and  not  to  her  own  sex.  But  it  is  pro- 
bable that  the  "  men  "  of  the  place  would  be 'the  first  persons  she 
woul'i  see,  and  that  the  women  would  not  be  in  the  streets,  but 
at  home.  Moreover  it  is  not  unlikely  that  the  expression  is 
meant  to  show  us  the  woman's  zeal  and  anxiety  to  spread  the 
good  tidings.  She  did  not  hesitate  to  speak  to  men,  though  she 
well  knew  that  anything  a  woman  might  say  about  religion  was 
dot  likely  to  command  attention. 

Cyril,  on  this  verse,  remarks  the  power  of  Christ's  grace.  He 
feegan  by  bidding  the  womnn  to  go  and  "  call  her  husband."  The 
end  of  the  conversation  which  ensued  was  her  going  and  calling 
all  the  men  of  the  city  to  come  and  see  Clu-ist. 

*^. — [Come,  see  a  maw.]  The  missionary  spirit  of  the  woman,  in 
this  verse,  deserves  special  notice.  Having  found  Christ  herself, 
she  invites  others  to  come  and  be  acquainted  with  Him.  Origen 
calls  her  "  the  apostle  of  the  Samaritans." 

Let  it  be  noted  that  her  words  are  simple  in  the  extreme.  She 
enters  into  no  argument.  She  only  asks  the  men  to  "  come  and 
see."  This,  after  all,  is  often  the  best  way  of  dealing  with  souls. 
A  bold  invitation  to  come  and  make  trial  of  the  Gospel  often 
produces  more  eflect  than  the  most  elaborate  arguments  in  sup- 
port of  its  doctrines.  Most  men  do  not  want  their  reason  con- 
vinced so  much  as  their  will  bent,  and  their  conscience  aroused. 
A  simple-minded,  hearty,  unlearned  young  disciple  will  often 
touch  hearts  that  would  hear  an  abstruse  argument  without  being 
moved. — This  fact  is  most  encouraging  to  all  hehevers  who  try 
to   do   good.     All  cannot  argue.     But  all  believers   may   say, 


235 

"  Come  and  see  Ch'  ist.     If  you  would  only  look  at  Him  and  see 
Him,  you  would  soon  believe." 

Barradius  remarks  what  a  practical  illustration  ihe  woman 
affords  of  one  of  the  concludmg  sentences  of  Revelation,  "  Let 
him  that  heareth  say,  Come."  (Rev.  xxii.  17.)  The  Samaritan 
woman  having  heard,  said  "  Come,"  and  the  result  was  that  manj 
souls  came  and  took  the  water  of  life  freely. 

Cyril  remarks  the  difference  between  the  woman's  conduct 
and  that  of  the  servant  who  buried  his  talent  in  the  ground. 
She  received  the  talent  of  the  good  tidings  of  the  Gospel,  and  at 
once  put  it  o.  '  at  interest. 

Chrysostom  remarks  the  wisdom  of  the  woman.  "  She  did 
not  say,  Come,  helieve,  but  Come,  see,  a  gentler  expression  than 
the  other,  and  one  which  more  attracted  them." 

\^Told  me  all  things. ..ever  I  did^  These  words  must  be  taken 
with  some  qualification?.  Of  course  they  cannot  mean  that  our 
Lord  had  literally  told  the  woman  "  all  things  that  ever  she  did 
in  her  life."  This  would  have  been  physically  impossible  in  th6 
space  of  a  single  afternoon. — The  probable  meaning  is,  "He  has 
told  me  all  the  principal  sins  that  I  have  committed.  He  has 
shown  a  perfect  knowledge  of  the  chief  events  of  my  life.  He 
has  shown  such  thorough  acquaintance  with  my  history,  that  I 
doubt  not  He  could  have  told  me  anything  I  ever  did." 

Some  allowance  must  probably  be  made  for  the  warm  and 
excited  feehngs  of  the  woman  when  she  spoke  these  words.  She 
used  hyperbolical  and  extravagant  language,  under  the  influence 
of  these  feelings,  which  she  would  probalDly  not  have  used  in  a 
calm  state  of  mind,  and  v/hich  we  must  therefore  not  judge  too 
strictly.  Moreover,  as  Poole  remarks,  it  admits  of  doubt 
whether  our  Lord  may  not  have  spoken  of  other  things 
in  the  conversation,  which  St.  John  has  not  been  inspired  to 
record. 

Let  it  be  noted,  that  the  Samaritan  woman,  in  saying  that 
"  our  Lord  had  told  her  all  things  she  had  ever  done,"  very 
probably  referred  to  the  common  opinion  about  Messiah's  om- 
niscience. The  Rabbinical  writers,  according  to  Lightfoot, 
specially  applied  to  Messiah  the  words  of  Isaiah,  "  He  shall 
make  him  of  quick  understanding  in  the  fear  of  the  Lord.  He 
shall  not  judge  by  the  sight  of  his  eyes."  (Isai.  xi.  3.)  Her 
words,  therefore,  were  a  well-known  argument,  that  our  Lord 
must  be  the  Christ,  and  her  object  in  using  them  would  be 
the  roughly  understood. 

[/s  not  this  the  Christ  ?]  The  Greek  words  so  rendered  would 
be  translated  with  equal  correctness,  "Is  this  the  Christ?     Can 


236  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

this  be  the  Christ?"  A  similar  form  of  interrosfative  sentence  is 
found  in  thirteen  other  places  in  the  New  Testament.  In  twelve 
of  them  the  interrogative  is  used  without  "  not,"  viz.,  Matt.  vii. 
16;  xxvi.  22,  26]  Mark  iv.  21;  xiv.  9;  Luke  vi.  39;  John  vii. 
31 ;  viii.  22;  xviii.  35;  Acts  x.  47 ;  2  Cor.  i.  17;  James  iiL  11. 
— In  only  one  place  is  the  interrogative  used  with  "  not,"  Matt. 
xii.  23.  I  am  inchned,  on  the  whole,  to  think  that  "  not"  would 
have  been  better  omitted  in  the  sentence  before  us.  Euthymiua 
takes  this  view. 

The  value  of  questions,  if  we  want  to  do  good  to  souls,  is 
well  illustrated  in  this  verse.  A  question  often  sets  working  a 
mind  which  would  be  utterly  unmoved  by  an  atfirmation.  It 
drives  the  mind  to  exertion,  and  by  a  gentle  compulsion  arouses 
it  to  think.  Men  are  far  less  able  to  go  to  sleep  under  religious 
teaching,  when  they  are  invited  to  answer  a  question.  The 
number  of  questions  in  the  New  Testament  is  a  striking  and 
instructive  fact.  Had  the  woman  said,  "  This  is  the  Christ !" 
she  might  have  excited  prejudice  and  dislike.  By  asking,  "  la 
this  the  Christ  ?"  she  got  the  men  to  inquire  and  judge  for  them- 
selves. 
30. — [Then  they  went  out  of  the  city.']  This  sentence  is  full  of 
encouragement  to  aU  who  try  to  do  good  to  souls.  The  words 
of  one  single  woman  were  the  means  of  arousing  a  whole  city 
to  go  forth  and  inquire  about  Christ.  We  must  never  despise 
the  smallest  and  meanest  efforts.  We  never  kn()W  to  wliat  the 
least  beginnings  may  grow.  The  grain  of  mustard  seed  at  Sychar 
was  the  word  of  a  feeble  woman,  "Come  and  see." 

Specially  we  ought  to  observe  the  encouragement  the  verse 
affords  to  the  efforts  of  women.  A  woman  may  be  the  means, 
undiT  Gor],  of  founding  a  Church.  Tlie  first  person  baptized  by 
Paul  in  Europe  was  not  a  man  but  a  woman,  Lydia,  the  seller  of 
purple. — Let  women  never  suppose  that  men  only  can  do  good. 
Women  also,  in  their  way,  can  evangehze  as  really  and  truly  as 
men.  Every  believing  woman  who  has  a  tongue  can  speak  to 
others  about  Christ. — The  Samaritan  woman  was  far  less  learned 
than  Nicodemus.  But  she  was  far  bolder,  and  so  did  far  more 
good. 

\^And  came  unto  him.]  Perhaps  the  sentence  would  be  more 
literally  rendered,  "  were  coming,"  or  "  began  to  come  to  Ilim." 
It  was  while  they  were  coming  that  the  conversation  which 
immediately  follows,  between  Christ  and  His  disciples,  took  place, 
and  perhaps  it  was  the  sight  of  the  crowd  coming  which  madd 
our  Lord  say  some  of  the  things  that  He  did. 

Calvin  remarks  on  this  part  of  the  woman's  history,  that  some 
may  think  her  blameable,  in  that  "while  she  is  still  ignoi-ant  and 
imperfectly  taught,  she  goes  beyond  the  limits  of  her  faith.     I 


237 

reply  that  she  would  have  acted  inconsiderately  if  she  had 
assumed  the  offt)e  of  a  teacher;  but  Avhen  she  desires  nothing 
more  than  to  excite  her  fellow-citizens  to  hear  Christ  speaking, 
we  will  not  say  that  she  forgot  herself,  or  proceeded  further 
than  she  had  a  right  to  do.  She  merely  does  the  office  of  a 
trumpet  or  a  bell,  to  invite  others  to  come  to  Christ." 

The  concluding  verse  shows  us  most  forcibly  that  ministera 
and  teachers  of  religion  ought  never  to  be  above  taking  pains 
and  trouble  with  a  single  soul.  A  conversation  with  one  person 
was  the  means  of  leading  a  whole  city  to  come  and  hear  Christ, 
and  resulted  in  the  salvation  of  many  souls. 

Cornelius  ^  Lapide,  at  this  point  of  his  commentary,  gi-avely 
informs  us  that  the  name  ot  the  Samaritan  woman  was  Pliotina, 
— that  after  her  conversion  she  preached  the  Grospel  at  Cartljage, 
and  that  she  suffered  martyrdom  there  on  the  20th  of  March,  on 
which  day  the  Romish  Marty rology  makes  special  mention  of 
her  name !  He  also  tells  us  that  her  head  is  kept  as  a  relic  at 
Rome,  in  the  BasUica  of  St.  Paul,  and  that  it  was  actually  shown 
to  him  there ! — It  is  well  to  know  what  ridiculous  and  lying 
legends  the  Church  of  Rome  palms  upon  Roman  Catholics  as 
truths,  while  she  withholds  from  them  the  Bible ! 


JOHN  IV.  31—42. 


31  In  the  mean  while  his  dis- 
ciples prayed  him,  saying,  Master, 
eat. 

32  But  he  said  unto  them,  I  have 
meat  to  eat  that  ye  know  not  of. 

33  Therefore  said  the  disciples 
one  to  another,  Hath  any  man 
brought  him  ought  to  eat  ? 

34  Jesus  saith  unto  them,  My 
meat  is  to  do  the  will  of  him  that 
sent  me,  and  to  finish  his  work. 

35  Say  not  ye.  There  are  yet 
four  months,  and  then  cometh  har- 
vest ?  behold,  I  say  unto  you.  Lift 
up  your  eyes,  and  look  on  the 
fields;  for  they  are  white  already 
to  harvest. 

3G  And  he  that  reapeth  receiveth 
wages,  and  gatliereth  fruit  unto  life 
eternal :  that  both  he  that  soweth 
and  he  that  reapeth  may  rejoice 
together. 


37  And  herein  is  that  saying  true, 
One  sowetli,  and  another  reapeth. 

38  I  sent  you  to  reap  that  where- 
on ye  bestowed  no  labour:  other 
men  laboured,  and  ye  are  entered 
into  their  labours. 

39  And  many  of  the  Samaritans 
of  that  city  behoved  on  him  for  the 
saying  of  the  woman,  which  testi- 
fied. He  told  me  all  that  ever  I  did. 

40  So  when  the  Samaritans  were 
come  unto  him,  they  besought  him 
that  he  would  tarry  with  them: 
and  he  abode  there  two  days. 

41  And  many  more  believed  be- 
cause of  his  own  vord ; 

42  And  said  unto  the  woman, 
Now  we  believe,  not  because  of  thy 
saying :  for  we  have  lieard  him  our- 
selves, and  know  that  this  is  in- 
deed ihc  Christ,  the  Saviour  of  the 
world. 


288  EXPOSITOKY  THOUGHTS. 

We  have,  for  one  thing,  in  these  verses,  an  instructive  pat- 
tern  of  zeal  for  the  good  of  others.  We  read,  that  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  declares,  "  My  meat  is  to  do  the  will 
of  him  which  sent  me,  and  to  finish  his  work."  To  do 
good  was  not  merely  duty  and  pleasure  to  Him.  He 
counted  it  as  His  food,  meat  and  drink.  Job,  one  of  the 
holiest  Old  Testament  saints,  could  say,  that  he  esteemed 
God's  word  "  more  than  his  necessary  food."  (Job  xxiii. 
15.)  Tlie  Great  Head  of  the  New  Testament  Church  went 
even  further.     He  could  say  the  same  of  God's  work. 

Do  w^e  do  any  work  for  God  ?  Do  we  try,  however 
feebly,  to  set  forward  His  cause  on  earth, — to  check  that 
which  is  evil,  to  promote  that  which  is  good  ?  If  we  do, 
let  us  never  be  ashamed  of  doing  it  with  all  our  heart, 
and  soul,  and  mind,  and  strength.  Whatsoever  our  hand 
finds  to  do  for  the  souls  of  others,  let  us  do  it  with  our 
might.  (Eccles.  ix.  10.)  The  world  may  mock  and  sneer, 
and  call  us  enthusiasts.  The  world  can  admire  zeal  in  any 
service  but  that  of  God,  and  can  j^raise  enthusiasm  on  any 
subject  but  *that  of  religion.  Let  us  work  on  unmoved. 
Whatever  men  may  say  and  think,  w6  are  walking  in  the 
steps  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

Let  us,  beside  this,  take  comfort  in  the  thought  that 
Jesus  Christ  never  changes.  He  that  sat  by  the  well  of 
Samaria,  and  found  it  "meat  and  drink"  to  do  good  to  an 
ignorant  soul,  is  always  in  one  mind.  High  in  heaven  at 
God's  right  hand.  He  still  delights  to  save  sinners,  and 
still  approves  zeal  and  labour  in  the  cause  of  God.  The 
work  of  the  missionary  and  the  evangelist  may  be  despised 
and  ridiculed  in  many  quarters.  But  while  man  is  mock- 
lug,  Christ  is  well  pleased.  Thanks  be  to  God,  Jesus  la 
the  same  yesterday,  and  to-day,  and  for  ever. 

We  have,  for  another  thing,  in  these  verses,  strong  en- 
couragement held  out  to  those  who  labour  to  do  good  to 
souls.     We  read,  that  our  Lord  described  the  world  as  a 


JOHN,    CHAP.    IV.  239 

"field  white  for  the  harvest;"  and  then  f^ aid  to  His  dis- 
ciples, "  He  that  reapeth,  receiveth  wages,  and  gathereth 
fruit  unto  life  eternal." 

Work  for  the  souls  of  men,  is  undoubtedly  attended  by- 
great  discouragements.  The  heart  of  natural  man  is  very 
hard  and  unbelieving.  The  blindness  of  most  men  to  their 
own  lost  condition  and  peril  of  ruin,  is  something  past 
description.  "  The  carnal  mind  is  enmity  against  GoJ." 
(Rom.  viii.  7.)  No  one  can  have  any  just  idea  of  the 
desperate  hardness  of  men  and  women,  until  he  has  tried 
to  do  good.  No  one  can  have  any  conception  of  the  small 
number  of  those  who  repent  and  believe,  until  he  has  per- 
sonally endeavoured  to  "  save  some."  (1  Cor.  ix.  22.)  To 
suppose  that  everybody  will  become  a  true  Christian,  who 
is  told  about  Christ,  and  entreated  to  believe,  is  mere 
childish  ignorance.  "  Few  there  be  that  find  the  narrow 
way  !"  The  labourer  for  Christ  will  find  the  vast  majority 
of  those  among  whom  he  labours,  unbelieving  and  impeni- 
tent, in  spite  of  all  that  he  can  do.  "The  many"  will  not 
turn  to  Christ.  These  are  discouraging  facts.  But  they 
are  facts,  and  facts  that  ought  to  be  known. 

The  true  antidote  against  despondency  in  God's  work, 
is  an  abiding  recollection  of  such  promises  as  that  before 
us.  There  are  "  wages "  laid  up  for  faithful  reapers. 
They  shall  receive  a  reward  at  the  last  day,  far  exceeding 
anything  they  have  done  for  Christ, — a  reward  propor- 
tioned not  to  their  success,  but  to  the  quantity  of  their 
work. — They  are  gathering  "fruit,"  which  shall  endure 
w^hen  this  world  has  passed  away, — fruit,  in  some  souls 
saved,  if  many  will  not  believe,  and  fruit  in  evidences 
of  their  own  faithfulness,  to  be  brought  out  before  assem- 
bled worlds.  Do  our  hands  ever  hang  down,  and  our 
knees  w^ax  faint  ?  Do  we  feel  disposed  to  say,  "  my  labour 
is  in  \ain  and  my  words  without  profit."  Let  us  lean  back 
at   such   seasons   on   this   glorious  promise.       There   are 


2tl:0  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

"  wages "  yet  to  be  paid.  There  is  "  fruit "  yet  to  be 
exhibited.  "  We  are  a  sweet  savour  of  Christ,  both  in 
thorn  that  are  saved  and  in  them  that  perish."  (2  Cor.  ii. 
15.)  Let  us  work  on.  "He  that  goeth  forth  and  weep- 
eth,  bearing  precious  seed,  shall  doubtless  come  again  with 
rejoicing,  bringing  his  sheaves  with  him."  (Psa.  cxxvi.  6.) 
One  single  soul  saved,  shall  outlive  and  outweigh  all  the 
kingdoms  of  the  world. 

We  have,  lastly,  in  these  verses,  a  most  teaching  instance 
of  the  variety  of  ways  by  which  men  are  led  to  believe 
Christ.  We  read  that  "  many  of  the  Samaritans  believed 
on  Christ  for  the  saying  of  the  woman."  But  this  is  not 
all.  We  read  again,  "Many  more  believed  because  of 
Christ's  own  word."  In  short,  some  were  converted 
through  the  means  of  the  woman's  testimony,  and  some 
were  converted  by  hearing  Christ  Himself. 

The  words  of  St.  Paul  should  never  be  forgotten,  "  There 
are  diversities  of  operations,  but  it  is  the  same  God  which 
worketh  all  in  all."  (1  Cor.  xii.  6.)  The  way  in  which  the 
Spirit  leads  all  God's  people  is  ahvays  one  and  the  same. 
But  the  paths  by  which  they  are  severally  brought  into 
that  road  are  often  widely  different.  There  are  some  in 
whom  the  work  of  conversion  is  sudden  and  instantaneous. 
There  are  others  in  whom  it  goes  on  slowly,  quietly,  and 
by  imperceptible  degrees.  Some  have  their  hearts  gently 
opened,  like  Lydia.  Others  are  aroused  by  violent  alarm, 
like  the  jailor  at  Philippi.  All  are  finally  brought  to  repen- 
tance toward  God,  faith  toward  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
and  holiness  of  conversation.  But  all  do  not  begin  with 
the  same  experience.  The  weapon  which  carries  convic- 
tion, to  one  believer's  soul,  is  not  the  one  which  first  pierces 
another.  The  arrows  of  the  Holy  Ghost  are  all  drawn 
from  the  same  quiver.  But  He  uses  sometimes  one  and 
sometimes  another,  according  to  His  own  sovereign  will. 

Are  we  converted  ourselves  ?     This  is  the  one  point  to 


JOHN,    CHAP.   IV.  241 

which  our  attention  ought  to  be  directed.  Our  experience 
may  not  tally  with  that  of  other  believers.  But  that  is 
not  the  question.  Do  we  feel  sin,  hate  it,  and  flee  from 
it  ?  Do  we  love  Christ,  and  rest  solely  on  Him  for  sal- 
vation ?  Are  we  bringing  forth  fruits  of  the  Spirit  in 
righteousness  and  true  holiness  ?  If  these  things  are  so 
wo  may  thank  God,  and  take  courage. 

Notes.     John  IV.  31 — 42. 

31. — {In  the  mean  while.]  This  expression  means  "  during  the  time 
when  the  Samaritans  were  coming  out  of  the  city  to  the  well," 
between  the  time  when  the  woman  went  her  way,  and  the  time 
when  her  fellow-countrymen,  aroused  by  her  testimony,  appear- 
ed at  the  well.  It  is  highly  probable  that  they  were  already  in 
sight. 

[Prayed.]  The  Greek  word  so  rendered  is  remarkable.  It  is 
frequently  used  to  convey  the  idea  of  ''  asking,  or  making  in- 
quiry." It  is  a  curious  fact  that  it  is  not  used  in  describing  any 
person's  address  to  God  in  prayer,  except  in  the  case  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  (John  xiv.  16 ;  xvi.  26 ;  xvii.  9,  15,  20.)  There  is 
one  remarkable  instance  where  it  seems  to  be  used  in  describing 
a  believer's  prayer.  (1  John  v.  16.)  But  this  instance  stands  so 
entirely  alone  that  it  is  probable  the  meaning  is  not  "pray,"  but 
"  make  curious  inquiry." 

[Master,  eat]  The  difference  between  our  Lord  and  His  dis- 
ciples appears  here  in  a  striking  manner.  Their  weak  minds 
were  preoccupied  with  the  idea  of  food  and  bodily  sustenance. 
His  heart  was  filled  with  the  great  object  of  His  ministry,  "  do- 
ing good  to  souls."  It  is  a  striking  illustration  of  a  difference 
that  may  frequently  be  seen  between  a  believer  of  great  grace 
and  a  believer  of  little  grace.  The  latter,  with  the  best  possible 
intentions,  will  oflen  attach  an  importance  to  bodily  and  tem- 
poral things,  with  which  the  strong  behever  will  feel  no  sym- 
pathy. 
32. — [I  have  meat,  &c.]  The  meaning  of  our  Lord's  words  in  this 
verse  must  evidently  be  figurative.  He  had  soul-nourishment 
and  soul-sustenance  of  which  His  disciples  were  ignorant.  He 
fi.und  such  refreshment  in  doing  good  to  ignorant  souls  that  for 
the  time  present  He  did  not  feel  bodily  hunger. 

There  is  no  neces-ity  for  supposing  that  our  Lord  referred  to 
any  miraculous  supply  of  His  bodily  wants  in  this  pl;'ce.  His 
words  appear  to  me  only  to  indicate  that  He  found  such  delight 
and  comfort  in  doing  good  to  souls,  that  it  was  as  good  as  meat 

11 


242  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

and  drink  to  Him.  Many  of  His  holiest  servants  in  every  age, 
I  believe,  conld  testify  much  the  same.  The  joy  and  happiness 
of  spiiitual  success  has  for  the  time  lifted  thf-m  above  all  bodily 
wants,  and  supplied  the  place  of  material  meat  and  drink.  I  see 
no  reason  why  this  may  not  have  been  the  case  with  our  Lord. 
He  had  a  body  in  all  respects  constituted  like  our  own. 

The  idea  of  some  writers  that  these  words  show  that  our 
Lord's  "  thirst "  was  only  simulated  and  pretended,  seems  to  mo 
utterly  unworthy  of  notice. 

The  application  of  the  words  which  every  believer  ought  to 
endeavour  to  make  to  himself,  is  familiar  to  every  well-instructed 
Christian.  He  has  supplies  of  spiritual  nourishment  and  sup- 
port, which  are  hidden  and  unknown  to  the  world.  These  sup- 
plies he  ought  to  use  at  all  times,  and  specially  in  times  of  sorrow 
and  trial. 

33. — [Therefore  said.. .one  to  another,  &c.'\  These  words  seem  to 
have  been  spoken  privately,  or  whispered  one  to  another,  by  the 
disciples.  Their  inability  to  put  any  but  a  carnal  sense  on  their 
Master's  words,  has  been  already  remarked.  In  slowness  to  see 
a  spiritual  sense  in  His  language  they  do  not  appear  at  all  unlike 
Nicodemus  and  the  Samaritan  woman.  "  What  wonder  is  it," 
says  Augustine,  ''  if  the  woman  could  not  understand  our  Lord, 
speaking  about  living  water,  when  the  disciples  could  not  under- 
stand Him  speaking  about  meat  ?" 

The  original  Greek  of  the  expression  "  hath  any  man  brought 
him  ought  to  eat,"  is  remarkable.  There  is  a  negative  left  out  in 
our  translation.  It  seems  to  show  that  the  question  of  the  wo- 
man, at  verse  29,  would  have  been  better  rendered,  "  Is  this  the 
Cljrist  ?     Can  this  be  the  Christ  ?" 

34. — [Jesus  saith,  cfec]  The  leading  idea  of  this  verse  is,  "  that  do- 
ing G-od's  wiU,  and  finishing  God's  work,  was  so  soul-refreshing 
and  pleasant  to  our  Lord  that  He  found  it  equivalent  to  meat 
and  drink." 

The  Greek  expression  rendered  "  to  do,"  and  "  to  finish," 
would  have  been  more  literally  rendered,  "  that  I  should  do," 
and,  "  that  I  should  finish."  But  there  can  be  little  doubt,  as 
Winer  remarks,  thiit  the  language  is  intended  to  have  an  infini- 
tive sense.  Precisely  the  same  construction  is  employed  in  ano- 
ther remarkable  place,  John  xvii.  3.  It  seems  matter  of  regret 
that  our  translators  did  not  render  that  verse  as  they  have  ren- 
dered the  verse  before  us.  It  should  have  been,  "  this  is  life 
eternal  to  know  thee,  &c." 

The  "  will  of  God,"  which  it  was  Christ's  meat  to  "  do,"  must 
mecui  God's  will,  that  salvation  by  faith  in  a  Saviour  should  be 


JOHN,    CHAP.    IT.  248 

proclaimed,  and  a  door  of  mercy  set  wide  open  to  the  cliief  of 
sinners.  "  It  is  my  meat,"  says  our  Lord,  "  to  do  that  will,  and 
to  proclaim  to  every  one  with  whom  I  speak  that  whosoever  be- 
lieveth  on  the  Son  shall  not  perish."  The  view  that  it  simply 
means,  "  my  meat  is  to  obey  God's  commandments  and  do  what 
He  has  told  me  to  do,"  appears  to  me  to  fall  short  of  the  full 
meaning  of  the  expression.  The  leading  idea  seems  to  me  to  be 
specially  God's  will  about  proclaiming  salvation  by  Christ.  Com- 
pare John  vi.  39,  40. 

The  "  work  of  God,"  which  it  was  Christ's  meat  to  "  finish," 
must  mean  that  work  of  complete  fulfilment  of  a  Saviour's  office 
which  Christ  came  on  earth  to  perform,  and  that  obedience  to 
God's  law  which  He  came  to  render.  "  It  is  my  meat,"  says  our 
Lord,  ''  to  be  daily  doing  that  great  work  which  I  came  into  the 
world  to  do  for  man's  eoul,  to  be  daily  preaching  peace,  and  daily 
fulfilling  all  righteousness."     Compare  John  xvii.  4. 

The  utter  unlikeness  between  Christ  and  all  ministers  of  the 
Gospel  who  perform  their  duties  in  a  mere  prefanctory  way,  and 
care  more  for  the  world,  and  its  pleasures  or  gains,  than  for  sav- 
ing souls,  is  strikingly  brought  out  in  this  and  the  preceding 
verse.  How  many  professing  teachers  of  religion  know  nothing 
whatever  of  the  spirit  and  habits  of  mind  which  our  Lord  here 
displays !  It  can  never  be  said  of  hunting,  shooting,  ball-going, 
card-playing,  farming  clergymen,  that  it  is  their  meat  and  drink 
to  do  God's  will  and  finish  His  work!  With  what  face  wdl  they 
meet  Christ  in  the  day  of  judgment  ? 

Cyril  says,  on  this  verse,  "  We  learn  from  hence  how  great  is 
the  love  of  God  towards  men.  He  caRs  the  conversion  of  lost 
people  His  meat." 

35. — [Say  not  ye,  &c.]     This  saying  is  interpreted  in  two  different 
ways. 

Some  think,  as  Origen,  Rupertus,  Brentius,  Beza,  Jansenius, 
Cyril,  Lightfoot,  Lampe,  Suicer,  and  many  others,  that  our  Lord 
really  meant  that  there  were  four  literal  months  to  harvest,  at 
the  time  when  He  spoke ;  and  that  as  the  harvest  began  about 
May,  He  spoke  in  February.  The  sense  would  then  be,  "  Ye  say 
at  this  time  of  the  year  that  it  wiU  be  harvest  in  four  months. 
I3ut  I  tell  you  there  is  a  spiritual  harvest  already  before  you,  if 
you  will  only  lift  up  your  eyes  and  see  it." 

Others  think,  as  De  Dieu,  Maldonatus,  Calovius,  Whitby, 
Schottgen,  Pearce,  Tittman,  Stier,  Alford,  Barnes,  and  Tholuck, 
that  our  Lord  only  meant  that  it  was  a  proverbial  saying  among 
the  Jews, — "  four  months  between  seed  time  and  harvest,"  and 
that  He  did  not  mean  the  words  to  be  literally  taken.  The  sense 
would  then  be,   '^Ye  havt  a  common  saying  that  it  is  four 


244  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

montLs  from  seed  time  to  harvest.     But  I  tell  you  that  in  spiri 
tiial  works  the  harvest  lipens  far  more  quickly.     Behold  those 
Samaritans  coming  out  already  to  hear  the  word,  the  very  day 
that  seed  has  been  sown  among  them.     The  fields  are  already 
white  for  harvest." 

Either  of  the  above  views  make  good  sense  and  good  divinity. 
Yet  on  the  whole  I  prefer  the  second  view,  viz. :  that  our  Lord 
quoted  a  proverb.  To  suppose  that  He  really  meant  that  there 
were  literally  four  months  to  pass  away  before  harvest,  appears 
to  me  to  involve  serious  chronological  difficulties.  It  necessitates 
the  assumption  that  at  least  thiee  quarters  of  a  year  had  passed 
away  since  the  passover,  when  our  Lord  puritied  the  temple. 
(John  ii.  23.)  No  doubt  this  possibly  may  have  been  the  case. 
But  it  does  not  appear  to  me  probable. — In  addition  we  must 
remember  that  our  Lord,  on  another  occasion,  referred  to  a  pro- 
verbial saying  about  the  weather,  beginning  much  as  He  does 
hi-re,  "  Ye  say."  Matt.  xvi.  3.  Moreover,  in  this  very  passage 
He  quotes  a  proverb  about  "  one  sowing  and  another  reaping," 
within  two  verses.  The  expression  therefoie,  "say  not  ye," 
seems  to  me  to  point  to  a  proverbial  saying  much  more  than  to 
a  fact.  The  antithesis  to  it  is  the  "  I  say,"  which  immediately 
follows. 

Calvin  says,  "By  this  expression,  do  not  ye  say?  Clirist  in- 
tended indirectly  to  point  out  how  much  more  attentive  the 
minds  of  men  are  to  earthly  than  to  heavenly  things,  for  they 
burn  with  so  intense  a  desire  of  harvest  that  they  carefully 
reckon  up  months  and  days,  while  it  is  astonishing  how  drowsy 
and  indolent  they  are  in  gathering  the  heavenly  wheat." 

Cornelius  d  Lapide  conjectures  that  the  disciples  had  been  talk- 
ing to  one  another  about  the  prospects  of  liarvest,  as  they  came 
to  the  well,  and  that  our  Lord  knowing  the  conversation,  referred 
to  it  by  the  words,  "do  not  ye  say  ?" 

[^Lift  up. ..eyes.  .look.. .JieJds.. .white.. .harvest]  There  can  be  little 
doubt  that  this  saying  must  be  interpreted  figuratively.  The 
sense  is,  "  There  is  a  harvest  of  souls  before  you  ready  to  be 
gathered  in."  The  same  figure  is  used  elsewhere.  (Matt.  ix.  37. 
Luke  X.  32.) 

Some  think,  as  Chrysostom,  that  when  our  Lord  said,  "  Be 
hold.. ..lift  up  your  eyes.. .look,"  He  spoke  with  especial  reference 
to  the  crowd  of  Samaritans  whom  He  saw  coming  from  the 
city  to  the  well.  If  this  be  so,  it  is  hard  to  suppose  that  He 
first,  began  conversation  with  the  woman  at  six  o'clock  in  the 
evening. 

Others  think,  thnt  our  Lord  spoke  these  words  Avilh  reference 
to  the  whole  world,  and  special!}-  the  Jewish  nation,  at  the  time 


JOHN,    CHAP.   IV.  245 

of  His  ministr}.  They  were  so  ready  and  prepared  for  the 
preaching-  of  the  Gospel,  that  they  were  hke  a  field  white  for 
harvest.  The  expression,  "  lift  up  your  eyes,"  is  used  elsewhere 
in  Scripture,  when  mental  attention  is  being  called  to  something 
rem  irkable.     See  Isai.  xlix.  18 ;  Ix.  4 ;  Gen.  xiii.  14,  15. 

I  am  disposed  to  think  that  both  views  are  correct.  Our  Lord 
wished  His  disciples  to  notice  that  both  at  Samaria  and  else- 
where the  minds  of  men  were  everywhere  ready  to  receive  the 
mes-age  of  the  Gospel  in  an  unusual  degree.  Let  them  mark 
how  willing  the  multitude  was  everywhere  to  listen  to  the  truth. 
Let  them  know  that  everywhere,  as  in  the  apparently  hopeless 
field  of  Samaria,  they  would  find  a  harvest  of  souls  ready  to  be 
reaped,  if  only  they  would  be  reapers. 

Chrysostom,  on  this  verse,  remark?,  "  Christ  leads  His  disciples, 
as  His  custom  is,  from  low  things  to  high.  Fields  and  harvests 
here  express  the  great  number  of  souls  which  are  ready  to  receive 
the  word.  The  ei/es  are  both  spiritual  and  bodily  ones,  for  they 
saw  a  great  multitude  of  Samaritans  now  approaching.  This 
expectant  crowd  He  calls,  very  suitably,  white  fields.  For  as 
the  corn,  when  it  grows  white,  is  ready  for  harvest,  so  were 
those  ready  for  salvation.  But  why  does  He  not  say  all  this  in 
direct  language  ?  Because  by  making  use  of  the  objects  around 
them  He  gave  great  vividness  and  power  to  His  words,  and  also 
caused  His  discourse  to  be  more  pleasant  and  sink  deeper  into 
their  memories." 

36. — [He  that  reapeth,  &c^  This  verse  seems  to  me  to  show  thai 
our  Lord  is  speaking  generally  of  the  field  of  this  world,  and  of 
the  whole  work  which  His  apostles  would  have  to  do  in  it,  not 
only  in  Samaria,  but  to  the  ends  of  the  earth.  The  verse  is  a 
general  promise  for  the  encouragement  of  all  labourers  of  Christ. 
The  full  meaning  of  it  can  hardly  be  brought  out  without  a  para- 
phrase. "The  reaper  of  the  spiritual  harvest  has  a  far  more 
honourable  and  satisfactory  office  than  the  reaper  of  the  natural 
harvest.  He  receives  wages  and  gathers  fruit  not  for  this  life 
only,  but  for  the  life  to  come.  The  wages  that  he  receives  are 
eternal  wages,  a  crown  of  glory  that  fadeth  not  away.  (1  Pet. 
V.  4.)  The  fruit  that  he  gathers  is  eternal  fruit,  souls  plucked 
from  destruction  and  saved  for  evermore."  See  Daniel  xii.  3; 
John  XV.  16;  and  1  Cor.  ix.  17. 

Burkitt,  and  several  other  writers,  call  attention  to  the  fact  that 
the  harvestman's  wages  are  much  more  than  the  wages  of  any 
o^:h'^r  labourer,  and  hence  draw  the  conclusion  that  no  Christian 
will  receive  so  glorious  a  reward  as  the  man  who  labours  to  win 
souls  to  Christ. 

[That  loth  7ie..,^oweth...reajpeih...rejoice  together.]     These   wo:;ds 


246  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

appeal  Id  me  to  refer  to  the  common  joy  that  there  will  be  in 
heaven  among  all  who  have  laboured  for  Christ,  when  the  whole 
harvest  of  saved  souls  is  finally  gathered  in.  The  Old  Testament 
prophets  and  John  the  Baptist,  who  sowed,  will  all  rejoice  toge- 
ther with  the  apostles,  who  reaped. — The  results  of  the  spiritual 
harvest  are  not  like  those  of  the  natural  harvest,  temporal,  but 
eternal,  so  that  a  day  will  come  when  all  who  have  laboured  for 
it  in  any  way,  either  by  sowing  or  reaping,  will  sit  down  and 
rejoice  together  to  all  eternity.  Here  in  this  world  the  sower 
sometimes  doe-i  not  live  to  see  the  fruit  of  his  labour,  and  the 
reaper  who  gathers  in  the  harvest  rejoices  alone.  But  work  done 
in  the  spiritual  harvest  is  eternal  work,  and  consequently  both 
sowers  and  reapers  are  sure  at  last  to  "rejoice  together,"  and  to 
see  the  fruit  of  their  toil. 

Let  it  be  noted,  that  in  heaven  there  will  at  last  be  no  jealousy 
and  envy  among  Christ's  labourers.  Some  will  have  been  sowers 
and  some  will  have  been  reapers.  But  all  will  have  done  that 
part  of  the  work  allotted  to  them,  and  all  will  finally  "rejoice 
together."     Envious  feelings  will  be  absorbed  in  common  joy. 

Let  it  be  noted,  that  in  doing  work  for  Christ,  and  labouring 
for  souls,  there  are  sowers  as  well  as  reapers.  The  work  of  the 
reaper  makes  far  more  show  than  the  work  af  the  sower.  Yet 
it  \a  perfectly  c'ear  that  if  there  was  no  sowing  there  would  be 
no  reaping.  It  is  of  great  importance  to  remember  this.  The 
Church  is  often  disposed  to  give  an  excessive  honour  to  Christ's 
reapers,  and  to  overlook  the  labours  of  Christ's  sowers. 

87. — [Herem...fhat  saying  true,  &c.  tfec]  Our  Lord  here  quotes  a 
proverbial  saying,  which  appears  to  me  to  confirm  the  view  I 
have  already  maintained,  that  the  expression  of  the  35th  verse, 
"  Say  not  ye  there  are  yet  four  months,"  &c.,  refers  to  a  proverb. 

The  phrase  "  herein"  means  literally,  "  in  this,"  and  seems  to  me 
to  refer  to  the  verse  which  immediately  follows.  "  That  common 
saying,  one  soweth  and  another  reapeth,  is  made  good  in  this 
way, — is  fulfilled  by  this  circumstance, — is  verified  in  the  follow- 
ing manner,  viz.,  I  sent  you  to  reap,"  &c. 

The  meaning  of  the  proverb  is  plain.  "  It  is  a  common  saying 
among  men  that  it  often  falls  to  one  to  sow  the  field  and  to 
another  to  reap  it.  The  sower  and  the  reaper  are  not  always 
the  same  person." 

The  fi  equent  use  of  proverbial  sayings  in  the  New  Testament 
deserves  notice.  It  shows  the  value  of  proverbs,  and  the  import- 
ance of  teaching  them  to  children  and  young  people.  A  pointed 
proverb  is  often  remembered  when  a  long  moral  lesson  is  for- 
gotten. 


247 

38. — [I ifcnf  you  to  reap,  <&c.]  Our  Lord  here  states  the  manner  in 
which  the  proverbial  saying  of  the  preceding  verse  is  true.  He 
tells  the  apostles  that  they  were  sent  to  reap  a  spiritual  harvest 
on  which  they  had  bestowed  no  labour.  Other  men  had  laboured, 
viz.,  the  prophets  of  the  Old  Testament  and  John  the  Baptist. 
They  had  broken  up  the  ground.  They  had  sown  the  seed.  The 
result  of  their  labour  was  that  the  minds  of  men  in  the  apostles' 
times  were  prepared  to  expect  the  Messiah,  and  the  apostles  had 
oniy  to  go  forth  and  proclaim  the  glad  tidings  that  Messiah  was 
come. 

Pearce  maintains  the  strange  notion  that  our  Lord,  in  this 
verse,  only  means,  "  I  sent  you  away  into  the  city  to  buy  meat. 
While  you  were  absent  I  sowed  spiritual  seed  in  the  heart  of  a 
Samaritan  woman.  She  is  now  gone  to  call  others.  These  and 
many  more  will  be  the  harvest  which  you  will  reap,  without 
having  bestowed  any  labour  on  it."  This  interpretation  seems 
to  me  quite  untenable. 

The  past  tense  in  this  verse,  "  I  have  sent,"  is  used,  as  a  gram- 
marian would  say,  proleptically.  It  means,  "I  do  send  you." 
Such  a  use  of  the  past  tense  is  common  in  Scripture,  and  espe- 
cially when  G-od  speaks  of  a  thing  about  to  be  done.  With  God 
there  is  no  uncertainty.  When  He  undertakes  a  thing,  it  may 
be  regarded  as  done  and  finished,  because  in  His  counsels  it  is 
certain  to  be  finished.  Our  Lord's  meaning  is,  "I  send  you 
throughout  Samaria,  Galilee,  and  Judaea,  to  reap  the  fruit  of  the 
labours  of  the  prophets  and  John  the  Baptist.  They  have  sowed, 
and  you  have  now  only  to  reap." 

Some  think,  as  Stier  and  Alford,  that  when  our  Lord  said, 
"  other  men  have  laboured,"  He  referred  rather  to  Himself  than 
to  the  prophets.  I  am  unable  to  see  this.  It  appears  to  me  a 
forced  and  unnatural  interpretation.  I  hold  decidedly  with  Chry- 
sostom,  Cyril,  Theophylact",  Calvin,  Zvvingle,  Melancthon,  Bren- 
tius,  Lampe,  and  Poole,  that  it  applies  principally  to  the  law  and 
prophets. — "If  the  prophets  were  not  the  sowers,"  saith  Augus- 
tine, "whence  had  that  saying  come  to  the  woman,  I  know  that 
Messias  cometh?" — Origen  says,  "Did  not  Moses  and  Elias,  the 
sowers,  rejoice  with  the  reapers,  Peter,  James,  and  John,  when 
they  saw  the  glory  of  the  Son  of  God  at  the  transfiguration  ?" 

Theophylact  sees  in  this  verse  a  strong  argument  against  the 
heretical  view  of  the  Marcionites,  Manichees,  and  others,  that 
the  New  Testament  is  contrary  to  the  Old.  Here  the  prophets 
and  apostles  are  spoken  of  together  as  labourers  under  one  com- 
mon Master,  in  one  common  field. 

The  idea  propounded  by  Bucer,  that  our  Lord  alludes  here  to 
the  heathen  philosophers  as  well  as  the  prophets,  seems  to  me 
unwarrantable  and  unsafe. 


248  EXPOSITORS   THOUGHTS. 

%9.— [Many... Samaritans... believed.]  About  the  exact  nature  of  the 
belief  mentioned  here  and  in  the  41st  verse,  we  have  no  mate- 
rials for  forminpr  an  opinion.  Whether  it  was  only  an  intellec 
tual  belief  that  Christ  was  the  Messiah,  or  whether  it  was  that 
true  faith  of  the  heart  which  justifies  a  sinner  betore  Grod,  we  are 
left  to  conjecture.  The  more  probable  opinion  appears  to  be  that 
it  was  true  faith,  though  very  weak  and  unintelligent,  like  that 
of  the  apostles  themselves.  It  is  a  strong  confirmation  of  this 
view,  that  when  Philip,  after  the  day  of  Pentecost,  went  down 
to  Samaria  and  preached  Christ,  his  preaching  was  received  with 
joy,  and  many  were  baptized,  both  men  and  women.  (Acts  viii. 
5 — 12.)  The  Gospel  was  received  without  prejudice,  and  em- 
braced at  once  as  an  acknowledged  truth. 

[For....saying... .woman...  testified,  c&c]  These  words  show  the 
importance  of  merely  human  testimony  to  Christ's  Gospel.  The 
word  of  one  weak  woman  was  made  the  instrumental  means  of 
behef  to  many  souls.  There  was  nothing  remarkable  in  the 
woman's  word.  It  contained  no  elaborate  reasoning,  and  no 
striking  eloquence.  It  was  only  a  hearty,  earnest  testimony  of 
a  believing  heart.  Yet  God  was  pleased  to  use  it  to  the  conver- 
sion of  souls.  We  must  never  despise  the  use  of  means.  If 
the  woman  had  not  spoken,  the  Samaritans  would  not  have  been 
converted. — Above  all,  we  must  never  despise  means  because 
of  their  apparent  weakness,  feebleness,  and  inaptness  to  do  good. 
God  can  make  the  weakest  instruments  powerful  to  pull  down 
the  strongholds  of  sin  and  Satan,  just  as  He  made  David's  sling 
and  stone  prevail  over  Goliah. 

Theophylact  points  out  that  the  Samaritan  woman's  past  wicked 
life  was  well  known  to  her  fellow-citizens,  and  that  their  atten- 
tion must  have  been  aroused  by  her  publicly  proclaiming  that  she 
had  found  One  who  knew  her  former  life,  although  a  stranger. 
They  rightly  concluded  that  He  must  be  no  common  person. 

Melancthon  remarks  that  the  belief  which  resulted  from  the 
testimony  of  a  woman  in  this  case,  is  a  clear  proof  that  it  is  not 
absolutely  necessary  to  have  regular  ministerial  orders,  in  order 
to  do  good  to  souls,  and  that  episcopal  orders  are  not  absolutely- 
needful  in  order  to  give  effect  to  the  word  when  spoken. 

iO. — [So  ivhen... Samaritans... come.. .besought.Jarry,  cfec]  The  desire 
nf  the  Samaritans  for  instruction  is  shown  in  this  verse,  and  the 
willingness  of  Christ  to  assist  inquirers  is  strikingly  exhibited. 
He  waits  to  be  entreated.  If  we  have  Him  not  abiding  with  us, 
it  is  because  we  do  not  ask  Him.  The  two  disciples  journeying 
to  Emmaus  would  have  missed  a  great  privilege  if  they  had  not 
said,  "  Abide  with  us."  (Luke  xxiv.  29.) 

Ferus  on  this  verse  remarks  the  wide  difference  between  the 
Samaritans  and  the  Gergesenes.      The  Gergesenes  prayed  our 


JOHN,  CHAP.  ly.  249 

Lord  to  "  depart "  from  them,  the  Samaritans  to  "  tarry  "  with 
them.  (Matt.  viii.  34.) 

[He  abode.. .two  days.]  We  can  only  suppose  that  these  two 
days  were  spent  m  teaching  and  preaching  the  G-ospel.  One 
would  like  to  know  all  that  was  thought  and  said  in  those  two 
days.  But  it  is  an  instance  of  the  occasional  "  silences "  of 
Scripture,  which  every  attentive  Bible-reader  must  have  noticed. 
The  first  thirty  years  of  our  Lord's  life  at  Nazareth, — the  way  in 
which  St.  Paul  speut  his  time  in  Arabia, — and  his  employment 
during  his  two  years'  imprisonment  in  Cassarea,  are  similar 
silences.  (G-al.  i.  17 ;  Acts  xxiv.  27.) 

It  is  an  interesting  fact  which  has  been  observed  by  some 
writers,  that  at  this  very  day,  Nablous  and  its  neighbourhood, 
occupying  the  site  of  Samaria  and  Sychar,  are  in  a  more  flourish- 
ing and  prosperous  condition  than  almost  any  place  in  Palestine. 
While  Capernaum,  and  Chorazin,  and  Bethsaida,  which  rejected 
Christ,  have  almost  entirely  passed  away,  Samaria,  which  believed 
and  received  Him,  flourishes  still. 

il. — [Mamj  more  believed.. ..own  luord.]  This  verse  shows  the 
sovereignty  of  Grod  in  saving  souls.  One  is  called  in  one  way 
and  another  in  another.  Some  Samaritans  believed  when  they 
heard  the  woman  testify.  Others  did  not  beheve  till  they  he^ird 
Christ  Himself. — We  must  be  careful  that  we  do  not  bind  down 
the  Holy  Ghost  to  one  mode  of  operation.  The  experience  of 
saved  souls  ofien  differs  widely.  If  people  are  brought  to  re- 
pentance and  faith  in  Christ,  we  must  not  be  stumbled  because 
they  are  not  all  brought  in  the  same  way. 

Olshausen  remarks  on  this  verse,  "  Here  is  a  rare  instance  in 
which  t'le  ministry  of  the  Lord  produced  an  awakening  on  a 
lai  ge  scale.  Ordinarily  we  find  that  a  few  individuals  only  were 
aroused  b}^  Him,  and  that  these,  like  grains  of  seed,  scattered 
here  and  the.  e,  became  the  germs  of  a  new  and  higher  order  of 
things  among  the  people  at  large." 

42. — [Ax»w;  we  beIieve....not....thy  saying.]  The  Greek  words  so 
rendered  would  be  translated  more  literally,  "Not  any  longer 
because  of  thy  saying  do  we  believe." 

Calvin  thinks  that  the  Greek  word  here  rendered  "  saying," 
means  literally,  "  talk  or  talkativeness,"  and  that  "  the  Samari- 
tans appear  to  boast  that  they  have  now  a  stronger  foundation 
than  a  woman's  tongue."  In  the  only  other  three  places  where 
it  is  used,  it  is  translated  "speech."  (Matt.  xxvi.  73;  Mark  xiv. 
70;  John  viii.  43.) 

[This  is  indeed....  Christ... Saviour.. ..world.]  The  Greek  words 
BO  rendered  would  be  translated  more  literally,  ''This  is  the 
Sayiour  of  the  world,  the  Christ." 

11* 


250  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

The  singular  fulness  of  the  confession  made  by  these  Samari' 
tans  deserves  special  notice.  A  more  full  declaration  of  our 
Lord's  office  as  "  Saviour  of  the  world  "  is  nowhere  to  be  found  in 
the  G-ospels.  Whether  the  Samaritans  clearly  understood  what 
they  meant  when  they  spoke  of  our  Lord  as  "  the  Saviour,"  may 
be  reasonably  doubted.  But  that  they  saw  with  pecahar  clear- 
ness a  truth  which  the  Jews  were  specially  backward  in  seeing 
that  He  had  come  to  be  a  Redeemer  for  all  mankind,  and  no* 
for  the  "  Jews "  only,  seems  evident  from  the  expression  ''  the 
world."  That  such  a  testimony  should  have  been  borne  to 
Christ,  by  a  mixed  race,  of  seini-heathen  origin,  like  the  Sama- 
ritans, and  not  by  the  Jews,  is  a  remarkable  instance  of  the 
grace  of  Grod. 

The  inference  drawn  by  Calvin  from  this  verse,  that  ''  within 
two  days  the  sense  of  the  Gospel  was  more  plainly  taught  by 
Christ  at  Samaria  than  he  had  hitherto  taught  it  at  Jerusalem," 
seems  both  unwarrantable  and  needless.  Ought  we  not  rather 
to  fix  our  eyes  on  the  dijfference  between  the  Jews  and  Samari- 
tans? Christ's  teaching  was  the  same,  but  the  hearts  of  His 
hearers  were  widely  different.  The  Jews  were  hardened.  The 
Samaritans  believed. 

Chemnitius,  on  this  verse,  thinks  that  an  emphasis  is  meant  to 
be  laid  on  the  Greek  word  rendered  "  indeed."  Literally  it  is 
"  truly."  He  thinks  it  was  used  of  our  Lord  in  contradistinction 
to  the  false  Christs  and  Messiahs  who  had  appeared  before  Him, 
as  well  as  to  the  typical  Messiahs  and  Saviours,  such  as  the 
Judges. 

In  leaving  the  passage  we  may  well  wonder  that  so  many 
'!  Samaritans  "  should  at  once  have  believed  on  our  Lord,  when 
so  few  "Jews"  ever  beUeved.  Our  wonder  may  well  be  in- 
creased, when  we  consider  that  our  Lord  worked  no  miracle  on 
this  occasion,  and  that  the  woi'd  was  the  only  instiument  used 
to  open  the  Samaritans'  hearts. — We  see,  for  one  thing,  the  entire 
sovereignty  of  the  grace  of  God.  The  last  are  often  first  and 
the  first  last.  The  most  ignorant  and  unenhghtened  believe 
and  are  saved,  while  the  most  learned  and  enlightened  continue 
unbelieving  and  are  lost. — We  see,  for  another  thing,  that  it  is 
not  miracles  and  privileges,  but  grace,  which  converts  souls. 
The  Jews  saw  scores  of  mighty  miracles  worked  by  our  Lord, 
and  heard  Him  preach  for  weeks  and  months,  and  yet  with  a 
few  rare  exceptions  remained  impenitent  and  hardened.  The 
Sarnarifans  saw  no  miracles  worked  at  all,  and  only  had  our 
Lord  among  (hem  for  two  days,  and  yet  many  of  them  believed. 
If  ever  there  was  clear  proof  that  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
is  the  chief  thing  needed  in  order  to  procure  the  conversion  of 
soul?,  we  have  it  in  the  verses  wc  are  now  leaving. 


JOHN,    CHAP.    IV. 


251 


The  allegorical  and  typical  meanings  which  some  writera 
assign  to  the  Samaritan  woman  and  her  history,  as  related  in 
this  cliapter,  are  hardly  worth  recounting.  Some  regard  the 
woman  as  a  type  of  the  Jewish  synagogue,  slavishly  bound  to 
the  five  books  of  the  law,  and  drawn  finally  by  Christ  to  drink 
the  living  water  of  the  Grospel. — Some  regard  the  woman  as  a 
typo  of  the  Gentile  nations,  for  five  thousand  years  committing 
fornication  with  heathen  idols,  and  at  length  purged  by  Christ,, 
and  casting  away  their  empty  water-pots  in  obedience  to  Chris- 
tianity,— Some  go  even  further,  and  regard  the  woman  as  a 
prophetical  type  of  things  yet  to  come.  They  consider  her  as  a 
type  of  the  Greek  Church,  which  is  yet  to  be  brought  into  the 
true  faith  of  Christ  I  These  views  appear  to  me  at  best  only 
fanciful  speculations,  and  more  Ukely  to  do  harm  than  good, 
by  drawing  men  away  from  the  plain  practical  lessons  which  the 
passage  contains. 


JOHN  lY.  43—54. 


43  Now  after  two  days  he  de- 
parted thence,  and  went  into  Gali- 
lee. 

44  For  Jesus  himself  testified, 
that  a  prophet  hath  no  honour  in 
his  own  country. 

45  Then  when  he  was  come  into 
Galilee,  the  Galilaeans  received  him, 
having  seen  all  the  things  that  he 
did  at  Jerusalem  at  the  feast :  for 
they  also  went  unto  the  feast. 

46  So  Jesus  came  again  into  Cana 
of  Galilee,  where  he  made  the  water 
wine.  And  there  was  a  certain 
nobleman,  whose  son  was  sick  at 
Capernaum. 

47  When  he  heard  that  Jesus 
was  come  out  of  Judsea  into  Galilee, 
he  went  unto  him,  and  besought 
him  that  he  would  come  down,  and 
heal  his  son:  for  he  was  at  the 
point  of  death. 

48  Then  said  Jesus  unto  him, 
Except  ye  sec  signs  and  wonders, 
ye  will  not  beUeve. 


49  The  nobleman  saith  unto 
him,  Sir,  come  dovni,  ere  my  child 
die. 

50  Jesus  saith  unto  him,  Go  thy 
way ;  thy  son  hveth.  And  the  man 
beUeved  the  word  that  Jesus  had 
spoken  unto  him,  and  he  went  his 
way. 

51  And  as  he  was  now  going 
down,  his  servants  met  him,  and 
told  him,  saying.  Thy  son  liveth. 

52  Then  enquired  he  of  them  the 
hour  when  he  began  to  amend. 
And  they  said  unto  him,  Yester- 
day at  the  seventh  hour  the  fever 
left  Mm. 

53  So  the  father  knew  that  it 
was  at  the  same  hour,  in  the  wliich 
Jesus  said  unto  him,  thy  son  liv- 
eth: and  himself  beheved,  and  his 
whole  house. 

54  This  is  again  the  second 
miracle  thai  Jesus  did,  when  he 
was  come  out  of  Judaea  into  Ga» 
lilee. 


Four  great  lessons  stand  out  boldly  on  the  face  of  this 


252  EXPOSITORY    THOUGHTS. 

passage.  Let  ns  fix  them  in  our  memories,  aud  use  ihem 
continually  as  we  journey  through  life. 

We  learn,  firstly,  that  the  rich  have  afflictions  as  well  as 
the  poor.  We  read  of  a  nobleman  in  deep  anxiety  because 
his  son  was  sick.  We  need  not  doubt  that  every  means 
of  restoration  was  used  that  money  could  procure.  But 
money  is  not  almighty.  The  sickness  increased,  and  the 
nobleman's  son  lay  at  the  point  of  death. 

The  lesson  is  one  which  needs  to  be  constantly  im- 
pressed on  the  minds  of  men.  There  is  no  more  common, 
or  more  mischievous  error,  than  to  suppose  that  the  lich 
have  no  cares.  The  rich  are  as  liable  to  sickness  as  the 
poor ;  and  have  a  hundred  anxieties  beside,  of  which  the 
poor  know  nothing  at  all.  Silks  and  satins  often  cover 
very  heavy  hearts.  The  dwellers  in  palaces  often  sleep 
more  uneasily  than  the  dwellers  in  cottages.  Gold  and 
silver  can  lift  no  man  beyond  the  reach  of  trouble.  They 
may  shut  out  debt  and  rags,  but  they  cannot  shut  out 
care,  disease,  and  death.  The  higher  the  tree,  the  more 
it  is  shaken  by  storms.  The  broader  its  branches,  the 
greater  is  the  mark  which  it  exposes  to  the  tempest. 
David  w^as  a  happier  man  when  he  kept  his  father's  sheep 
at  Bethlehem,  than  when  he  dwelt  as  a  king  at  Jerusalem, 
and  governed  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel. 

Let  the  servant  of  Christ  beware  of  desiring  riches. 
They  are  certain  cares,  and  uncertain  comforts.  Let  him 
pray  for  the  rich,  and  not  envy  them.  How  hardly  shall 
a  rich  man  enter  the  kingdom  of  God !  Above  all,  let 
him  learn  to  be  content  with  such  things  as  he  has.  He 
only  is  truly  rich,  who  has  treasure  in  heaven. 

We  learn,  secondly,  in  this  passage,  that  sickness  and 
death  come  to  the  young  as  loell  as  to  the  old.  We  read  of 
a  son  sick  unto  death,  and  a  father  in  trouble  about  him. 
We  see  the  natural  order  of  things  inverted.  The  elder 
is  obliged  to  minister  to  the  younger,  and  not  the  younger 


JOHN,    CHAP.    IV.  253 

to  the  elder.  The  child  draws  nigh  to  the  grave  before 
the  parent,  and  not  the  parent  before  the  child. 

The  lesson  is  one  which  we  are  all  slow  to  learn.  We 
are  apt  to  shut  our  eyes  to  plain  facts,  and  to  speak  and 
act,  as  il  young  people,  as  a  matter  of  course,  never  died 
when  young.  And  yet  the  grave-stones  in  every  church- 
yard would  tell  us,  that  few  people  out  of  a  hundred  ever 
live  to  be  fifty  years  old,  while  many  never  grow  up  to 
man's  estate  at  all.  The  first  grave  that  ever  was  dug 
on  this  earth,  was  that  of  a  young  man.  The  first  person 
who  ever  died,  was  not  a  father  but  a  son.  Aaron  lost 
two  sons  at  a  stroke.  David,  the  man  after  God's  own 
heart,  lived  long  enough  to  see  three  children  buried. 
Job  was  deprived  of  all  his  children  in  one  day.  These 
things  were  carefully  recorded  for  our  learning. 

He  that  is  wise,  will  never  reckon  confidently  on  long 
life.  "We  never  know  what  a  day  may  bring  forth.  The 
strongest  and  fairest  are  often  cut  down  and  hurried  away 
in  a  few  hours,  while  the  old  and  feeble  linger  on  for  many 
years.  The  only  true  wisdom  is  to  be  always  prepared  to 
meet  God,  to  put  nothing  off  which  concerns  eternity,  and 
to  live  like  men  ready  to  depart  at  any  moment.  So  living, 
it  matters  little  whether  we  die  young  or  old.  Joined  to 
the  Lord  Jesus,  we  are  safe  in  any  event. 

We  learn,  thirdly,  from  this  passage,  what  benefits  afflic- 
tion can  confer  on  the  soul.  We  read,  that  anxiety  about 
a  son  led  the  nobleman  to  Christ,  in  order  to  obtain  help 
in  time  of  need.  Once  brought  into  Christ's  company,  he 
learned  a  lesson  of  priceless  value.  In  the  end,  "  he 
believed,  and  his  whole  house."  All  this,  be  it  remembered, 
liinged  upon  the  son's  sickness.  If  the  nobleman's  son 
had  never  been  ill,  his  father  might  have  lived  and  died  in 
his  sins. 

Affliction  is  one  of  God's  medicines.  By  it  He  often 
teaches  lessons  which  would  be  learned  in  no  other  way. 


25-1  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

By  it  He  often  draws  souls  away  from  sin  and  the  worlds 
which  would  otherwise  have  perished  everlastingly.  Health 
is  a  great  blessing,  but  sanctified  disease  is  a  greater. 
Prosperity  and  worldly  comfort,  are  what  all  naturally 
desire ;  but  losses  and  crosses  are  far  better  for  us,  if  they 
lead  us  to  Christ.  Thousands  at  the  last  day,  will  testify 
with  David,  and  the  nobleman  before  us,  "  It  is  good  for 
me  that  I  have  been  afflicted."  (Psa.  cxix.  71.) 

Let  us  beware  of  murmuring  in  the  time  of  trouble. 
Let  us  settle  it  firmly  in  our  minds,  that  there  is  a  meaning, 
a  needs'be,  and  a  message  from  God,  in  every  sorrow  that 
falls  upon  us.  There  are  no  lessons  so  useful  as  those 
learned  in  the  school  of  affliction.  There  is  no  commentary 
that  opens  up  the  Bible  so  much  as  sickness  and  sorrow. 
"  No  chastening  for  the  present  seeraeth  to  be  joyous,  but 
grievous :  nevertheless  afterward  it  yieldeth  peaceable 
fruit."  (Heb.  xii.  11.)  The  resurrection  morning  will 
prove,  that  many  of  the  losses  of  God's  people  were  in 
reality  eternal  gains. 

We  learn,  lastly,  from  this  passage,  that  Christ'' s  word 
is  as  good  as  Chrisfs  presence.  We  read,  that  Jesus  did 
not  come  do^\'n  to  Capernaum  to  see  the  sick  young  man, 
but  only  spoke  the  word,  "Thy  son  liveth."  Almighty 
power  went  with  that  little  sentence.  That  very  hour  the 
patient  began  to  amend.  Christ  only  spoke,  and  the  cure 
was  done.  Christ  only  commanded,  and  the  deadly  disease 
Btood  fast. 

The  fact  before  us  is  singularly  full  of  comfort.  It  gives 
enormous  value  to  every  promise  of  mercy,  grace,  and 
peace,  which  ever  fell  from  Christ's  lips.  He  that  by  faith 
has  laid  hold  on  some  word  of  Christ,  has  got  his  feet  upon 
a  rock.  What  Christ  has  said,  He  is  able  to  do  ;  and  what 
He  has  undertaken.  He  will  never  fail  to  make  good.  The 
einner  who  has  really  reposed  his  soul  on  the  word  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,  is  safe  to  all  eternity.     He  could  not  be  safer. 


JOHN,   CHAP.   IV.  255 

il'  he  saw  the  book  of  life,  and  his  own  name  written  in  it. 
If  Christ  has  said,  "Him  that  cometh  to  me,  I  will  in 
nowise  cast  out,"  and  our  hearts  can  testify,  "I  have 
come,"  we  need  not  doubt  that  we  are  saved.  In  the 
things  of  this  world,  we  say  that  seeing  is  believing.  But 
in  the  things  of  the  Gospel,  believing  is  as  good  as  seeing  ' 
Christ's  word  is  as  good  as  man's  deed.  He  of  whom 
Jesus  says  in  the  Gospel,  "  He  liveth,"  is  alive  for  ever- 
more, and  shall  never  die. 

And  now  let  us  remember  that  afflictions,  like  that  of  the 
nobleman,  are  very  common.  They  will  probably  come  to 
our  door  one  day.  Have  we  known  anything  of  bearing 
affliction  ?  Would  we  know  where  to  turn  for  help  and 
comfort  when  our  time  comes  ?  Let  us  fill  our  minds  and 
memories  betimes  with  Christ's  words.  They  are  not  the 
words  of  man  only,  but  of  God.  The  words  that  he  speaks 
are  spirit  and  life.  (John  vi.  63.) 

Notes.    John  IV.  43 — 54. 

43. — [After  two  day  si]  The  G-reek  words  here  would  be  more 
hteraily  rendered,  "  After  the  two  days,"  i.  e.,  after  the  two  days 
mentioned  in  the  preceding  verse. 

[Departed  thence.']  Quesnel  remarks,  "  It  is  an  instance  of  self- 
denial  wliich  is  very  uncommon,  to  leave  those  who  respect  and 
applaud  us,  that  we  may  go  to  preach  among  others  from  whom 
we  have  reason  to  expect  a  quite  different  treatment." 

44. — [.For  Jesus  himself  testified.. Ms  oivn  country^  This  verse  has 
much  perplexed  commentators.  What  is  meant  by  the  expi-es- 
sion,  ''His  own  country?"  If  it  means  Gahlee,  as  most  sup- 
pose, how  are  we  to  reconcile  it  with  the  words  which  follow, 
"the  Galileans  received  him?" — And  again,  what  is  the  connec- 
tion between  the  verse  before  us  and  the  one  which  precedes  it  ? 
Why  should  our  Lord  go  into  Galilee,  when  it  was  a  place  where 
He  had  no  honour?  And  finally,  how  are  we  to  reconcile  the 
statement  that  our  Lord  had  n)  "honour"  in  Galilee  with  the 
undeniable  fact  that  nearly  all  His  disciples  and  adherents  were 
Galileans  ?  All  these  points  have  given  rise  to  much  speculation 
and  conjecture. 

(o.)     Some,  as  Origen  and  Maldonatus,  get  over  the  difficult/ 


256  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

in  the  following  manner.  They  say  that  the  words,  "  His  own 
country,"  mus^t  mean  Jadasa,  and  Bethlehem,  where  Christ  was 
born.  The  sense  will  then  be,  ''  alter  two  days  Jesus  departed 
from  Samaria,  and  went  into  Galilee,  and  not  into  Judiea,  ba 
cause  in  Judoea  He  received  no  honour,  and  was  not  believed.* 
This  solution  seems  to  me  unnatural  and  unsatisfactory.  Our 
Lord's  going  to  Galilee  was  a  premeditated  journey,  and  not  a 
sudden  plan  decided  on  during  His  stay  at  Samaria.  Beside  this, 
there  is  no  proof  whatever  that  our  Lord  was  not  received  and 
believed  in  Judaea.  On  the  contrary.  He  "made  and  baptized" 
so  many  disciples  in  Judgea,  that  it  attracted  the  notice  of 
the  Pharisees,  and  made  it  necessary  for  Him  to  "  depart  into 
Guhlee." 

(b.)  Augustine  holds  that  "  His  own  country"  means  Galilee, 
and  seems  to  attach  the  following  sense  to  the  verse,  "  And  yet 
Jesus  testified  that  a  prophet  hath  no  honour  in  his  own  country, 
for  when  he  came  into  Galilee  no  one  believed  on  Him,  except 
the  nobleman  and  his  house,"  This  appears  to  me  a  far-fetched 
and  unnatural  interpretation.  Tittman  and  Blomfield  take 
much  the  same  view,  and  render  it,  "  Although  Jesus  had  testi- 
fied, '  &c. 

(c.)  Chrysostom  and  Euthymius  think  that  "  His  own  coun- 
try" means  Capernaum.  This  interpretation  also  seems  to  me 
improbable.  We  find  Capernaum  elsewhere  called  our  Lord's 
"  own  city,"  but  nowhere  else  "  His  own  country."  (See  Matt, 
ix.  1.) 

(d.)  Theophylact  suggests  that  the  verse  before  us  is  inserted 
in  order  to  explain  "  why  our  Lord  did  not  always  abide  and 
continue  in  Galilee,  but  only  came  there  at  intervals.  The  reason 
was  that  He  received  no  honour  there."  This  also  seems  to  me 
an  unsatisfactory  interpretation. 

(e.)  Alford  aays,  "  The  only  true  and  simple  view  is,  that  thia 
verse  refers  to  the  next  following,  and  indeed  to  the  whole  nar- 
rative which  it  introduces.  It  stands  as  a  preliminary  explana- 
tion of  '  Except  ye  see  signs  and  wonders  ye  will  not  believe,' 
and  indicates  the  contrast  between  the  Samaritans,  who  believed 
on  Him  for  His  own  word,  and  His  own  countrymen,  who 
only  received  Him  because  they  had  seen  the  miracles  which 
He  did  at  Jerusalem."  This  view  of  the  text  seems  to  me  as 
fai-fetchevi  and  unsatisfactory  as  any  of  those  I  have  mentioned 
Moreover  I  doubt  much  whether  the  Greek  word  rendered 
''for,"  is  ever  used  in  the  sense  Alford  puts  on  it,  in  the  New 
Testament. 

(/.)  Tlie  following  explanation  appears  to  me  by  far  the  most 
probable  one.  The  words,  "  His  own  country,"  mean  neither 
Galilee  nor  Judaea,  but  "Nazareth."     The  sense  is,  "Jesus  de- 


JOHN,  ciJ.vp.  IV.  257 

parted  f;om  Samaria  into  Galilee,  but  not  to  His  own  country 
Nazareth,  bccaute  He  lestilied,  both  now  and  on  other  occasions, 
that  a  prophet  has  no  honour  in  his  own  country." — In  contir- 
mation  of  the  view  I  have  maintained,  it  deserves  notice,  that 
in  tlie  six  only  places  in  which  the  Greek  word  here  rendered 
"country"  is  found  in  the  Gospels,  beside  the  one  before  us,  it 
always  meaDS  the  town  of  Nazareth,  and  not  the  district  in  which 
Nazaieth  is  situated.  (Matt.  xiii.  54,  57  ;  Mark  vi.  1,  4 ;  Luke  iv. 
23,  24.)  The  view  I  have  supported  is  that  of  Cyiil,  CalTin, 
Calovius,  Lampe,  Poole,  De  Dieu,  Pearce,  Doddridge,  Dyke,  and 
Olshausen. 

Our  Lord's  use  of  a  proverb  in  this  verse  is  again  worthy  of 
notice.     It  is  another  proof  of  the  value  of  proverbial  sayings. 

The  lesson  of  the  proverb  is  a  very  instructive  one.  It  is  one 
of  the  most  melancholy  proofs  of  man's  fallen  and  corrupt  state, 
that  he  never  values  what  he  is  familiar  with,  and  that  familiarity 
breeds  contempt.  Ministers  of  the  Gospel  discover  this  by  pain- 
ful experience,  when  they  have  resided  many  years  in  the  same 
parish,  and  ministered  long  in  the  same  congregation.  Those 
who  have  the  most  abundant  supply  of  Gospel  privileges  are 
often  the  people  who  value  them  least.  "  The  nearer  the  church 
the  further  from  God,"  is  often  found  to  be  hterally  true.  Those 
who  hve  furthest  off,  and  are  obliged  to  deny  themselves  most 
in  order  to  hear  the  Gospel,  are  often  the  very  persons  who  take 
most  pains  to  hear  it. 

One  grain  of  comfort,  however,  may  be  extracted  from  this 
painful  verse.  A  minister  must  not  despair,  and  accuse  himself 
of  unfaithfulness,  because  the  Gospel  he  preaches  is  not  honoured 
in  his  own  congregation,  and  many  remain  hardened  and  unbe- 
lieving, after  he  has  preached  to  them  many  years.  Let  him 
remember  thnt  he  is  sharing  his  Master's  lot.  He  is  drinkino-  the 
very  cup  of  which  Christ  drank.  Christ  had  no  honour  in  Naza- 
reth, and  faithful  ministers  have  often  less  honour  among  their 
own  people  than  they  have  elsewhere. 

Pellican  thinks  that  our  Lord  "  testified  "  the  truth  contained 
in  this  verse  in  reply  to  some  one  who  asked  Him  why  He  did 
not  go  to  Nazareth.  I  prefer  the  opinion  that  it  simply  means 
our  Lord  "  always  did  testify,  and  made  a  practice  of  testifying." 

i5. — [Galilceans  received  him.']  The  word  "received"  probably 
means  no  more  than  that  they  "received  Him  with  respect  and 
reverence,"  as  One  who  was  no  common  person.  There  is  no 
warrant  for  supposing  that  they  all  received  Him  with  true  faith, 
and  experimentally  believed  on  Him  as  the  Saviour  of  their 
souls. 

[Having  seen....things....Jerusalem....fea&:^     This  expression  con- 


258  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

firms  tlie  vitw  already  maintained  (Jolm  ii.  23),  that  our  Lord 
did  many  otlier  miracles  at  Jerusalem  at  the  first  passover,  when 
He  was  there,  beside  casting  the  buyers  and  sellers  out  of  the 
temple,  It  is  probable  that  the  miracles  recorded  in  the  four 
Gospels  are  only  a  selection  out  of  the  number  that  Christ 
worked. 

Here,  as  elsewhere,  we  see  the  special  use  of  miracles.  Thev 
served  to  arrest  men's  attention,  and  gave  the  impression  that 
He  who  wrought  them  deserved  a  hearing.  The  Galileans  were 
ready  to  receive  Christ  respectfully,  because  they  had  seen  His 
miracles. 

{They  also  went.... feast.]  This  sentence  is  a  useful  proof  of  the 
universality  of  the  Jewish  custom  of  attending  the  great  feasts  at 
Jerusalem,  and  especially  the  feast  of  the  Passover.  Even  those 
who  lived  furthest  off  from  Jerusalem,  in  Galilee,  made  a  point 
of  going  to  the  Passover  It  serves  to  show  the  publicity  of  our 
Lord's  ministry,  both  in  life  and  death.  When  He  was  crucified 
at  the  Passover,  the  event  happened  in  the  presence  of  myi  iads 
of  witnesses  from  every  part  of  the  world.  The  overruling  pro- 
vidence of  God  ordered  things  so  that  the  facts  of  Christ's  life 
and  death  could  never  be  denied.  "  This  thing  was  not  done  in 
a  corner."  (Acts  xxv.  26.) 

4-G. — [Jestis  came  again....  Can  a.]  The  circumstance  of  our  Lord 
going  twice  to  Cana  may  be  accounted  for  by  remembering  the 
fact  that  one  of  His  disciples,  "  Nathanael,"  belonged  to  Cana, 
and  that  His  mother,  Mary,  in  all  probability  had  relatives  there. 
(See  note  on  John  iil  1.) 

[A  certain  nobleman.]  The  Greek  word  rendered  "  nobleman  " 
is  only  found  here  in  this  sense,  as  a  substantive,  in  the  New 
Testament.  The  marginal  reading,  "  courtier  or  ruler,"  hardly 
makes  it  more  clear.  Some  have  conjectured  that  the  nobleman 
must  have  been  some  one  attached  to  Herod's  court,  and  is 
therefore  called  "  a  royal  person,"  which  is  the  literal  meaning  of 
the  word.  Some,  as  Luther,  Cliemnitins,  Lightfoot,  and  Pearce, 
have  also  conjectured  that  "  Chuza,  Herod's  steward,"  whose 
wife  Joanna  became  one  of  our  Lord's  disciples,  and  "ministered 
unto  Him,"  (Luke  viii.  3,)  must  have  been  this  nobleman.  This 
is  no  doubt  possible,  and  would  be  an  interesting  fact  if  it  could 
be  proved.  But  there  is  no  authority  for  it,  except  conjecture. 
Lightfoot  adds  a  conjecture,  that  if  not  Chuza  it  might  have  been 
Manaen.  (Acts  xiii.  1.) 

The  rarity  of  a  nobleman  and  a  person  connected  with  a  royal 
court  seeking  Christ  under  any  circumstances,  is  observed  by 
Glassins  and  others.  It  shows  us  that  Christ  will  hive  trophies 
of  the  power  of  His  grace  out  of  every  rank,  clas.s,  and  condition. 


JOHN,    CHAP.    IV.  259 

In  the  first  chapter  of  St.  John's  Grospel  we  see  fishermen  con- 
verted ;  in  the  third,  a  self-righteous  Pharisee;  in  the  beginning 
of  the  fourth,  a  fallen  Samaritan  woman ;  and  in  the  end,  a  noble- 
man out  of  a  king's  court. 

Pearce  thinks  that  the  nobleman  was  one  of  the  class  called 
Herodians.  (Matt.  xxii.  16.) 

[Son  was  sick  at  Capernaum^  "We  should  always  nofice  thii 
number  and  greatness  of  miracles  which  our  Lord  worked  at 
Capernaum,  and  the  dignity  of  the  persons  at  whose  instance 
they  were  worked.  Here  He  healed  the  Centurion's  servant. 
(Matt.  viii.  5.)  Here,  in  all  probability,  He  restored  to  life  the 
daughter  of  Jairus,  the  ruler  of  the  synagogue.  (Mark  v.  21.) 
And  here,  in  the  present  instance,  He  healed  the  nobleman's 
son.  Three  distinct  and  leading  classes  had,  each  of  them,  a 
mighty  miracle  wrought  among  them.  Tiie  Centurion  wa^  a 
Gentile  soldier.  The  ruler  of  the  synai;ogue  was  a  Jew  of  high 
ecclesiastical  position.  The  nobleman  was  connected  with  the 
highest  civil  authorities.  The  consequence  no  doubt  was  that 
the  name  and  power  of  Christ  be<'ame  known  to  every  leading 
family  in  Capernaum.  No  wonder  that  our  Lord  say^,  '•  Thou 
Capernaum  that  art  exalted  unto  heaven."  (Matt.  xi.  23.)  No 
place  was  so  privileged  as  this  city. 

The  idea  entertained  by  some  that  this  "  nobleman  "  was  the 
same  as  the  Centurion  in  Matt.  viii.  5,  and  that  the  miracle  here 
recorded  is  only  the  same  miracle  differently  reported,  seems  to 
me  entirely  destitute  of  foundation.  The  details  of  the  two  mir- 
acles are  entirely  different.  The  miracle  before  us  is  nowhere 
else  reported  in  the  Gospels. 

47. — [Heard  that  Jesus  was  come,  &c.'\  This  verse  shows  how 
widely  spread  was  the  fame  of  the  miracle  wrought  at  Can  a 
upon  the  occas'on  of  our  Lord's  former  visit,  and  how  great  was 
the  report  of  our  Lord's  miracles  at  Jerusalem,  brought  back  by 
the  Galileans  who  went  to  the  feast.  In  no  other  way  can  we 
account  for  the  nobleman  going  to  our  Lord  and  beseeching  Him 
to  come  and  heal  his  son.  Our  Lord  must  have  got  the  reputa- 
tion of  being  One  who  was  both  able  and  willing  to  work  such 
cures. 

Museulus  remarks  on  this  verse,  how  much  more  love  descends 
than  ascends.     In  all  the  Gospels  we  never  read  of  any  sons  or 
*    daughters  coming  to  Christ  on  behalf  of  their  parents. 

Dyke  observes,  "  Some  crosses  drive  men  to  Christ,  especially 
in  our  children.  This  was  the  cross  that  subdued  Egypt:  and  to 
great  men,  such  as  this  ruler,  who  have  much  to  leave  their  chil- 
dren, this  cross  is  the  greatest." 

48. — [  Then  said  Jesus^  Except  ye  see,  d;c.}    Our  Lord  in  this  verse 


260  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

appears  to  refer  to  the  common  desire  expressed  by  the  Jews  to 
see  miracles  and  signs,  as  a  proof  of  His  Messiahship.  "  Cannot 
you  believe  unless  you  actually  see  with  your  own  eyes  a  miracle 
worked  ?  Is  your  faith  so  small,  that  except  you  see  something 
you  cannot  believe  ?" — No  doubt  our  Lord  knew  the  heart  of  the 
man  before  Him.  He  wished  to  test  his  faith,  and  to  draw  out 
from  him  more  earnest  desires  after  the  mercy  that  he  wanted. 
The  resemblance  between  our  Lord's  first  answer  to  the  noble- 
man and  His  first  answer  to  the  woman  of  Canaan,  who  came 
to  Him  about  her  daughter,  deserve  comparison.  (Matt.  xv.  24.) 

Chrysostom  remarks,  "  Christ's  meaning  is,  Ye  have  not  yet 
the  right  faith,  but  still  feel  towards  me  as  only  a  prophet.  He 
r6buketh  the  state  of  mind  wiih  which  the  nobleman  had  come 
to  Him,  because  that  before  a  miracle  he  believed  not  strongly. 
Thus  too  He  drew  him  on  the  more  to  belief — That  the  noble- 
man came  and  entreated  was  nothing  wonderful,  for  parents  in 
their  great  affection  are  wont  to  resort  to,  and  talk  with  physi- 
cians. But  that  he  came  without  any  strong  purpose  appears  from 
this,  that  he  only  came  to  Christ  when  Christ  came  into  Galilee, 
whereas,  if  he  had  firmly  believed,  he  would  not  have  hesitated, 
when  his  child  was  at  the  point  of  death,  to  go  into  Judaea." 

Glassius  thinks  that  our  Lord,  in  these  words,  intends  to  con- 
trast the  faith  of  the  Samaritans  with  the  unbelief  of  the  Gali- 
leans. The  Samaritans  believed  without  having  seen  any  signs 
or  wonders  at  all. 

Chemnitius  thinks  that  our  Lord,  in  this  verse,  spoke  with  spe- 
cial reference  to  the  state  of  mind  in  which  He  found  the  inhabi- 
tants of  Cana  upon  His  second  visit.  He  thinks  that  He  found 
them  aroused  to  a  state  of  expectation  and  curio.^ity,  by  H  s 
miracle  of  changing  water  into  wine,  but  still  destitute  of  any 
real  saving  faith. 

Poole  compares  the  nobleman  to  Naaman,  who  had  faith 
enough  to  come  to  Elisha's  door  to  be  healed  of  his  leprosy,  but 
was  stumbled  because  Elisha  did  not  put  his  hand  on  the  diseased 
place,  but  only  sent  him  a  message.  (2  Kings  v.  11.) 

id. — [The  nobleman  saith,  t&c]  This  verse  shows  the  earnestness 
of  the  nobleman's  desire  for  relief,  quickened  and  sharpened  by 
the  apparent  rebuff  contained  in  oin-  Lord's  reply  to  his  fiist 
application.  Yet  it  was  a  saying  exhibiting  much  ignorance.  It 
is  dear  that  he  did  not  discover  what  our  Lord  hinted  at,  that 
possibly  he  might  be  helped  without  His  coming  down  to  S3e  hia 
sick  son.  He  neither  denies  the  iruth  of  our  Lord's  words,  nor 
enters  into  argument.  He  only  knew  that  he  felt  in  grievous 
distress,  and  begged  our  Lord  to  "come  down  ere  his  child  died." 
That  our  Lord  could  heal  him  he  did  not  doub\     Bat  that  He 


JOHN,    CHAP.    IV.  261 

conld  heal  him  at  a  distance,  without  even  seeing  him,  was  some- 
thing that  he  could  not  yet  understand. 

Chrysostom  says,  "  Observe  how  thes3  very  words  show  the 
weakness  of  (he  man.  When  he  ought,  after  Christ  had  rebuked 
his  state  of  mind,  to  have  imagined  something  great  concerning 
Him,  even  if  he  did  not  before,  listen  how  he  drags  along  the 
ground!  Pie  speaks  as  though  Christ  could  not  raise  his  son 
after  death,  and  as  though  He  knew  not  in  what  state  the  child 
was." 

Brenti'is  remarks  that  the  nobleman  did  not  bring  to  Christ 
faith,  but  merely  a  spark  of  faith. 

50. — {Jesus  saith  vnto  Am,  d'c]  Three  things  are  very  deserving  of 
notice  in  this  verse,  (a.)  We  should  observe  our  Lord's  mar- 
vellous Idndness  and  compassion.  He  takes  no  notice  of  the 
nobleman's^vveak  faith  and  slowness  of  understanding.  He 
freely  grants  his  request,  and  gives  his  son  life  and  health  with- 
out delay.  (&.)  We  should  observe  our  Lord's  ajmighty  power. 
He  simply  speaks  the  words,  "  Thy  son  liveth,"  and  at  once  a 
sick  person,  at  several  miles'  distance,  is  cured  and  made  well. 
He  spake  and  it  was  done,  (c.)  We  should  observe,  not  least, 
the  unhesitating  confidence  which  the  nobleman  reposed  in  our 
Lord's  power.  He  asked  no  more  questions  after  he  heard  the 
words,  '•  Thy  son  Uveth."  At  once  he  believed  that  all  would  be 
well,  and  went  his  way. 

Cyri!  observes  on  this  verse,  that  onr  Lord  here  healed  two 
persons  at  one  time  by  the  same  words.  "  He  brought  the 
nobleman's  mind  to  faith,  and  delivered  the  body  of  the  young 
man  from  disease." 

Chrysostom  remarks,  '■  What  can  be  the  reason  why  in  the 
case  of  the  Centurion  Christ  undertook  voluntarily  to  come  and 
heal,  while  here,  though  invited,  he  came  not  ?  Because  in  the 
case  of  the  Centurion  faith  had  been  perfected,  and  therefore  He 
undertook  to  go,  that  we  might  learn  the  right-mindedness  of 
the  man;  but  here  the  nobleman  was  imperfect.  When  there- 
fore he  continually  urged  Him,  saying.  Come  down,  and  knew 
not  clearly  that  even  when  absent  He  could  heal.  He  showeth 
that  even  this  was  possible  unto  Him,  in  order  that  this  man 
might  gain,  from  His  not  going,  that  knowledge  which  the  Cen- 
turion had  of  himself." 

Bishop  Ha  1  observes,  "  The  ruler's  request  wa=:,  Come  and 
heal.  Christ's  answer  was,  '  Go  thy  way:  thy  son  hveth.'  Our 
merciful  Saviour  meet^  those  in  the  end  whom  He  crosses  in  the 
way.  How  sweetly  doth  He  correct  our  prayers ;  and  while  He 
doth  not  give  us  wlia!:  we  asked,  gives  us  better  than  we  asked." 

51. — [As  he  teas  now  going  down.].    The  relative  posit'ons  of  Caua 


262  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

and  Capernaum  are  not  precisely  known  at  the  present  day. 
The  exact  site  of  Capernaum  is  matter  of  dispute  among  travel- 
lers and  geographers.  All  we  can  glean  from  the  expression 
before  us  is,  that  Cana  was  probably  in  the  hill  country,  and 
Capernaum  on  the  lake  of  Galilee.  Hence  a  person  leaving  Cana 
for  Capernaum  would  "  go  down." 

\_Thy  son  liveih.]  The  meaning  of  this  expression  must  evi- 
dently be,  ''  Thy  son  is  so  much  better,  that  he  is  comparatively 
alive  from  the  dead.     He  was  as  one  dead.     He  is  now  alive." 

52. — [Then  inquired  he  the  hour.]  This  man's  mind  seems  at  once 
to  have  laid  hold  on  the  nature  of  the  miracle,  and  to  have 
acknowledged  the  power  of  Christ's  word. 

[He  began  to  amend]  The  G-reek  expression  so  rendered  is  a 
very  peculiar  one,  and  only  found  in  this  place.  It  is  hterally, 
"  Had  himself  better,  in  more  elegant  order." — Let  it  be  noted, 
that  here,  as  elsewhere,  we  find  an  expression  which  is  only  used 
once  in  the  New  Testament.  This  shows  that  it  is  no  valid 
argument  against  the  inspiration  of  any  text  or  passage,  that  it 
contains  Creek  expressions  nowhere  else  used. 

[Yesterday  at  the  seventh  hour.]  This  expression  has  been 
differently  interpreted — according  to  the  view  which  commenta- 
tors take  of  St.  John's  mode  of  reckoning  time.  Those  who 
think  that  he  numbered  hours  in  the  same  way  that  we  do,  main- 
tain that  it  means,  ''  at  seven  o'clock  in  the  evening."  Those, 
on  the  contrary,  who  maintain  that  St.  John  observed  the  Jew- 
ish mode  of  computation,  say  that  it  means  "  at  one  o'clock  in 
the  afternoon." 

I  have  already  given  it  as  my  decided  opinion,  that  John 
obsei'ves  the  Jewish  mode  of  reckoning  time ;  and  I  therefore 
hold  with  those  who  think,  that  "  the  seventh  hour"  means  one 
o'clock.  The  arguments  of  those  who  say  that,  if  ii  had  been 
one  o'clock,  the  nobleman  would  never  have  taken  till  the  next 
day  to  reach  home,  appear  to  my  mind  quite  inconclusive.  For 
one  thing,  we  know  nothing  accurately  of  the  distance  from 
Cana  to  Capernaum. — For  another  thing,  we  fjrget  the  slow  rate 
at  which  people  travel  in  Eastern  countries,  on  bad  roads,  in  a 
hilly  country. — For  another  thing,  it  is  entirely  an  assumption 
to  suppose  that  the  nobleman  had  nothing  else  to  do  at  Cana, 
when  he  came  to  Jesus  about  his  son.  For  anything  we  know, 
he  had,  as  a  nobleman,  business  of  various  kinds,  which  male  it 
impossible  for  him  to  reach  home  in  the  afternoon  nfter  Jesns 
had  said,  '^Thy  son  liveth." — Last,  but  not  least,  it  seems  hardly 
probable  that  the  nobleman  would  have  asked  our  Lord  to  come 
down  to  Capernaum  at  so  late  an  hour  as  seven  o'clock  in  the 
evening ;  or  would  have  set  off  on  his  own  return  ai  that  hour, 
and  met  his  servants  in  the  night. 


JOHX,   CHAP.   IV.  263 

[The  fever  left  him.]  Trench  remarks,  that  the  words  seem  to 
indicate,  that  there  was  no^  merely  an  abatement  of  the  lexer, 
but  that  it  suddenly  fur.sook  him.     Compaie  Luke  iv,  9. 

53. — [Himself  believed.]  Beda  remarks,  on  the  matter  of  the  noble- 
man's believing,  that  "there  are  three  degrees  of  faith, — the 
beginning,  the  increase,  and  the  perfect- on.  There  was  a  begin- 
ning in  this  man,  when  he  first  came  to  Christ;  an  inurease,  \\  hen 
our  Lord  told  him  that  his  son  lived;  and  a  perfection,  whei.  he 
found  him  to  have  recovered  at  that  very  time." 

[His  whole  house.]  This  expression  probably  mean?,  "  his 
whole  family," — including  children  and  servants.  We  have  no 
right  whatever  to  exclude  children  from  the  sense  of  the  words. 
Remembering  this,  we  shall  better  understand  what  is  meant, 
when  it  is  written,  St.  Paul  baptized  "  the  household  of  Stepha- 
nas :  "  or  when  it  is  related,  that  the  house  of  Lydia  was  baptized. 
(1  Cor.  i.  16 ;  Acts  xvi.  15.) 

There  seems  no  reason  for  doubting  that  the  nobleman,  from 
this  time  forth,  became  a  thorough,  true-hearted,  beUever  in 
Christ.  If,  as  some  suppose,  he  is  the  same  as  Chuza,  Herod's 
steward,  we  may  perhaps  date  the  conversion  of  Joanna  his  wite, 
to  the  period  of  the  verse  now  before  us. 

Bishop  Hall  remarks  on  this  verse,  "  G-reat  men  cannot  want 
clients.  Their  example  sways  some :  their  authority  more. 
They  cannot  go  to  either  of  the  other  worlds  alone.  In  vain  do 
they  pretend  power  over  others,  who  labour  not  to  draw  their 
famihes  to  Grod." 

54. — [The  second  miracle  that  Jesus  did.]  The  plain  meaning  of  these 
words  is,  that  our  Lord  had  worked  no  other  miracle  in  Galilee 
before  this  one,  excepting  that  of  turning  the  w-ater  into  wine  at 
Cana.  It  appears  likely  that  many  of  our  Lord's  earhest  miracles 
were  wrought  in  Judaea  and  Jerusalem;  although  we  have  no  re- 
cord of  them,  except  in  the  second  chapter  of  St.  John's  GospeL 
(John  ii.  23.)  This  fact  is  note-worthy,  because  it  throws  Hght 
on  the  wickedness  of  the  Jews  at  Jerusalem,  where  at  last  Christ 
was  condemned  and  crucified. 

Chrysostom  remarks,  "  The  word  '  second'  is  not  added  with- 
out cause,  but  to  exalt  yet  more  the  praises  of  the  Samaritans, 
by  showing  that  even  when  a  second  miracle  had  been  wrought, 
they  who  beheld  it  had  not  yet  reached  so  high  as  those  who 
had  not.  seen  one." 

Origen  says,  "  Mystically  the  two  journeys  of  Christ  into 
G-alilee  signify  His  two  advents.  At  the  first  He  makes  us  His 
guests  at  supper,  and  gives  us  wine  to  drink.  At  the  second  He 
raises  up  the  nobleman's  son  at  the  point  of  death, — ke.,    the 


26^  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Jewish  people,  who  after  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles  attain  salva- 
tion. The  sick  son  is  the  Jewish  people  fallen  from  the  true 
religion. — This  is  patristic  interpretation  !  Allegoiical  expositions 
like  this  destroy  the  whole  value  of  God's  word.  At  this  rate 
the  Bible  niay  be  made  to  mean  anything. 

Chemnitius  thinks,  that  with  this  chapter  ends  the  first  year 
of  our  Loi  d's  public  ministry,  and  gives  a  useful  summary  of  the 
principal  events  comprehended  within  it.  These  are  the  Lord's 
baptism, — the  calling" of  the  first  disciples, — the  miracle  at  Cana, 
— the  miracle  of  casting  out  of  the  temple  the  buyers  and  sell- 
«?rs, — the  conversation  with  Nicodemus, — the  tarrying  in  Judaea 
and  baptizing, — the  testimony  of  John  the  Baptist, — the  journey 
through  Samaria,  — the  arrival  in  Gralilee, — and  the  healing  of  the 
nobleman's  son.  Epiphanius,  he  observes,  calls  it  the  "  acceptable 
year"  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  because  it  was  the  most  quiet  and 
peaceful. 

Bengel,  in  closing  this  chapter,  observes,  that  St.  John  seems 
to  arrange  our  Lord's  miracles  in  threes.  He  relates  three  in 
Galilee, — the  first  at  the  marriage  in  Cana,  the  second  on  the 
nobleman's  son,  the  third  in  feeding  five  thousand  men  (John 
vi.) ; — three  in  Judaea, — the  first  at  Bethesda  at  pentecost  (ch.  v.), 
the  second  after  the  feast  of  tabernacles,  on  the  bhnd  man  (ch. 
ix.),  the  third  on  Lazarus  before  the  passover  (ch.  xi.). — So  also 
after  the  ascension,  he  describes  three  appearances  of  our  Lord 
to  His  disciples.  (John  xxi.  14.) 

Dyke  observes  how  God  keeps  account  of  all  the  gracious 
means  He  affords  men  for  their  good.  "  The  second  miracle  ia 
specified  to  aggravate  the  infidelity  of  the  Jews ;  that  though 
Christ  had  now  done  another  and  a  second  miracle,  yet  only  the 
ruler  and  his  household  beheved.  Two  miracles  wrought,  and 
one  household  converted  1  God  takes  account  not  only  how 
many  men  are  won  by  a  sermon,  (Acts  ii.  41,)  but  of  how  many 
sermons  are  lost  by  men." 


JOHN  Y.  1—15. 


1  After  this  there  was  a  feast  of 
the  Jews;  and  Jesus  went  up  to 
Jerusalem. 

2  Now  there  is  at  Jerusalem  by 
the  sheep  market  a  pool,  which 
is  called  in  the  Hebrew  tongue 
BeUtic^sda,  having  five  porch ^js. 


3  In  these  lay  a  great  multitude 
of  impotent  folk,  of  blind,  halt, 
withered,  waiting  for  the  moving  of 
the  water. 

4  For  an  angel  went  down  at  a 
certain  season  into  the  pool,  and 
troubled    the   water  :     whosoever 


265 


then  arst  after  the  troubling  of  the 
water  stepped  in  was  made  whole 
of  whatsoever  disease  he  had. 

5  And  a  certain  man  was  there, 
which  had  an  infirmity  thirty  and 
eight  years. 

6  When  Jesus  saw  Mm  lie,  and 
knew  that  he  had  been  now  a  long 
timo  in  that  case,  he  saith  unto 
him,  "Wilt  thou  be  made  whole  ? 

7  The  impotent  man  answered 
him,  Sir,  I  have  no  man,  when  the 
water  is  troubled,  to  put  me  into 
the  pool:  but  while  I  am  coming, 
another  steppeth  down  before  me. 

8  Jesus  saith  unto  him,  Rise, 
take  up  thy  bed,  and  walk. 

9  And  immediately  the  man  was 
made  whole,  and  took  up  his  bed, 
and  walked :  and  on  the  same  day 
was  the  sabbath. 

10  The  Jews  therefore  said  unto 


1  him  that  was  cured.  It  is  the  sab- 
'  bath  day :  it  is  not  lawful  for  thee 
to  carry  thy  bed. 

11  He  answered  them,  He  that 
made  me  whole,  the  same  said  unto 
me.  Take  up  thy  bed,  and  walk. 

12  Then  asked  they  him.  What 
man  is  that  which  said  unto  thee 
Take  up  thy  bed,  and  walk  ? 

13  And  he  that  was  healed  wist 
not  who  it  was :  for  Jesus  had  con- 
veyed himself  away,  a  multitude 
being  in  that  place. 

14  Afterward  Jesus  findeth  him 
in  the  temple,  and  said  unto  him, 
Behold,  thou  art  made  whole  :  sin 
no  more,  lest  a  worse  thing  como 
unto  thee. 

15  The  man  departed,  and  told 
the  Jews  that  it  was  Jesus,  which 
had  made  him  whole. 


We  have  in  this  passage  one  of  the  few  miracles  of  Christ, 
which  St.  John  records.  Like  every  other  miracle  in  this 
Gospel,  it  is  described  with  great  minuteness  and  particu- 
larity. And  like  more  than  one  other  miracle  it  leads  on 
to  a  discourse  full  of  singularly  deep  instruction. 

We  are  taught,  for  one  thing,  in  this  passage,  what 
misery  sin  has  brought  into  the  world.  We  read  of  a  man 
who  had  been  ill  for  no  less  than  thirty-eight  years !  For 
eight-and-thirty  weary  summers  and  winters  he  had  endured 
pain  and  infirmity.  He  had  seen  others  healed  at  the  waters 
of  Bethesda,  and  going  to  their  homes  rejoicing.  But  for 
him  there  had  been  no  healing.  Friendless,  helpless,  and 
hopeless,  he  lay  near  the  wonder-working  waters,  but 
derived  no  benefit  from  them.  Year  after  year  passed 
away,  and  left  him  still  un cured.  No  relief  or  change  for 
the  better  seemed  likely  to  come,  except  from  the  grave. 

When  we  read  of  cases  of  sickness  like  this,  we  should 
remember  how  deeply  we  ought  to  hate  sin  !  Sin  was  the 
original  root,  and  cause,  and  fountain  of  every  disease  in 

12 


266  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

the  world  God  did  not  create  man  to  be  full  of  aches,  and 
pains,  and  infirmities.  These  things  are  the  fruits  of  the 
Fall.  There  would  have  been  no  sickness,  if  there  had 
heen  no  sin. 

No  greater  proof  can  be  shown  of  man's  inbred  un- 
belief, than  his  carelessness  about  sin.  "  Fools,"  says  the 
wise  man,  "make  a  mock  at  sin."  (Pro.  xiv.  9.)  Thou- 
sands delight  in  things  which  are  positively  evil,  and  run 
greedily  after  that  which  is  downright  poison.  They  love 
that  which  God  abhors,  and  dislike  that  which  God  loves. 
They  are  like  the  madman,  who  loves  his  enemies  and 
hates  his  friends.  Their  eyes  are  blinded.  Surely  if  men 
would  only  look  at  hospitals  and  infirmaries,  and  think 
what  havoc  sin  has  made  on  this  earth,  they  would  never 
take  pleasure  in  sin  as  they  do. 

Well  may  we  be  told  to  pray  for  the  coming  of  God's 
kingdom !  Well  may  we  be  told  to  long  for  the  second 
advent  of  Jesus  Christ!  Then,  and  not  till  then,  shall 
there  be  no  more  curse  on  the  earth,  no  more  sufiTering, 
no  more  sorrow,  and  no  more  sin.  Tears  shall  be  wiped 
from  the  faces  of  all  who  love  Christ's  appearing,  when 
their  Master  returns.  Weakness  and  infirmity  shall  all 
pass  away.  Hope  deferred  shall  no  longer  make  hearts 
sick.  There  will  be  no  chronic  invalids  and  incurable 
cases,  when  Christ  has  renewed  this  earth. 

We  are  taught,  for  another  thing,  in  this  passage,  hoic 
great  is  the  mercy  and  compassion  of  Christ.  He  "  saw" 
the  poor  sufferer  lying  in  the  crowd.  Neglected,  over- 
looked, and  forgotten  in  the  great  multitude,  he  was 
observed  by  the  all-seeing  eye  of  Christ.  *'  He  knew  "  full 
well,  by  His  Divine  knowledge,  how  long  he  had  been 
*'  in  that  case,"  and  pitied  him.  He  spoke  to  him  unex- 
pectedly, with  words  of  gracious  sympathy.  He  liealed 
him  by  miraculous  power,  at  once  and  without  tedious 
delay,  and  sent  him  home  rejoicing. 


JOHN,    CHAP.   V.  267 

This  is  just  one  among  many  examples  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ's  kindness  and  compassion.  He  is  full  of 
undeserved,  unexpected,  abounding  love  towards  man. 
"He  delighteth  in  mercy."  (Micah  vii.  18.)  He  is  far 
more  ready  to  save  than  man  is  to  be  saved,  far  more 
willing  to  do  good  than  man  is  to  receive  it. 

No  one  ever  need  be  afraid  of  beginning  the  life  of  a 
true  Christian,  if  he  feels  disposed  to  begin.  Let  him 
not  hang  back  and  delay,  under  the  vain  idea  that  Christ 
is  not  willing  to  receive  him.  Let  him  come  boldly,  and 
trust  confidently.  He  that  healed  the  cripple  at  Bethesda 
is  still  the  same. 

We  are  taught,  lastly,  the  lesson  that  recovery  from 
sickness  ought  to  impress  upon  us.  That  lesson  is  contained 
in  the  solemn  words  which  our  Saviour  addressed  to  the 
man  He  had  cured :  "  Sin  no  more,  lest  a  worse  thing  come 
unto  thee." 

Every  sickness  and  sorrow  is  the  voice  of  God  speaking 
to  us.  Each  has  its  peculiar  message.  Happy  are  they 
who  have  an  eye  to  see  God's  hand,  and  an  ear  to  hear 
His  voice,  in  all  that  happens  to  them.  Nothing  in  this 
world  happens  by  chance. 

And  as  it  is  with  sickness,  so  it  is  with  recovery. 
Renewed  health  should  send  us  back  to  our  post  in  the 
world  with  a  deeper  hatred  of  sin,  a  more  thorough 
watchfulness  over  our  own  ways,  and  a  more  constant 
purpose  of  mind  to  live  to  God.  Far  too  often  the  excite- 
ment and  novelty  of  returning  health  tempt  us  to  forget 
the  vows  and  intentions  of  the  sick-room.  There  are 
spiritual  dangers  attending  a  recovery !  Well  would  it  be 
for  us  all  after  illness  to  grave  these  words  on  our  hearts, 
"  Let  me  sin  no  more,  lest  a  worse  thing  come  unto  me." 

Let  us  leave  the  passage  with  grateful  hearts,  and  bless 
God  that  we  have  such  a  Gospel  and  such  a  Saviour  as 
the  Bible  reveals. — Are  we  ever   sick   and  ill?     Let  us 


268  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

remember  that  Christ  sees,  and  knows,  and  can  heal  J 
He  thinks  fit. — Are  we  ever  in  trouble?  Let  us  heai 
in  our  trouble  the  voice  of  God,  and  learn  to  hate  sin 
more. 

Notes.    John  Y.  1—15. 

1. — [AJier  this.]  Literally  translated,  this  would  be,  "aftei  these 
things."  Some  think  that  when  St.  John  is  telling  some  event 
which  follows  immediately  after  the  last  thing  narrated,  be  uses 
the  expression,  "  after  this  thing "  (as  John  ii.  12),  but  that 
wiien  there  has  been  an  interval  of  time  he  uses  the  expression, 
"  after  these  things." — If  this  be  correct,  we  must  suppose  that 
some  space  of  time  elapsed  between  the  healing  of  the  noble- 
man's son  and  the  visit  to  Jerusalem,  recorded  in  this  chapter. 

[A  feast  of  the  Jews.]  Tliere  is  nothing  to  show  what  feast 
this  was.  Most  commentators  think  it  was  the  passover.  Many 
however  think  it  was  the  feast  of  pentecost.  Some  few  say  it 
was  the  feast  of  tabernacles,  some  the  feast  of  purim,  and  some 
the  feast  of  the  dedication.  Each  view  has  its  advocates,  and 
the  question  will  probably  never  be  settled.  An  argument  in 
favour  of  the  passover  is  the  f ict  that  none  of  the  five  Jewish 
feasts  were  so  regularly  attended  by  devout  Jews  as  the  pass- 
over.  An  argument  against  it  is  the  fact  that  on  three  other 
occasions,  when  the  feast  of  the  passover  is  mentioned  in  St. 
John,  he  carefully  specifies  it  by  name;  and  one  would  naturally 
expect  that  it  would  be  named  here. 

The  matter  is  really  of  no  peculiar  importance.  In  one  point 
of  view  only  it  is  interesting. — If  the  "feast"  was  the  passover, 
it  proves  that  there  were  four  passovers  during  the  period  of  our 
Lords  ministry  on  earth.  St.  John  mentions  three  by  name, — 
beside  this  '*  feast."  (John  ii.  23;  vi.  4;  xii.  I.)  This  would 
m.ike  it  certain  that  our  Lord's  ministry  lasted  three  full  years, 
or  at  any  rate  must  have  begun  with  a  passover,  and  ended  Avith 
a  passover. — If  the  "feast"  was  not  the  passover,  we  have  no 
pioof  that  His  ministry  lasted  longer  than  between  two  and 
three  years.     (See  notes  on  John  ii.  13.) 

The  expression,  "a  fea-t  of  the  Jews,"  is  one  of  many  inci- 
dental evidences  that  St.  John  wrote  specially  for  the  use  of 
Gentile  converts,  and  that  he  thought  it  needful  for  their  benefit 
to  explain  Jewish  ordinances. 

[Jesus  went  up.]  The  f  equency  of  our  Lord's  attendance  at 
Jewish  feasts,  and  the  respect  He  showed  for  ^losaic  ordinances, 
should  always  be  noticed.  They  were  appointed  by  God.  and 
8o  long  as  they  lasted,  He  gave  them  honour.     It  is  an  important 


269 

proof  t3  us,  that  the  unworthiness  of  minist'^rs  is  no  reason  for 
neglectin/^  God's  ordinances,  such  as  bapti-m  and  the  Lord'a 
Supper  The  benefit  we  receive  from  ordinances  and  sacraments 
does  not  depend  on  the  character  of  those  who  administer  them, 
but  on  ihe  state  of  our  own  souls.  The  pries's  and  officers  of 
the  Tei  iple.  in  our  Lord's  time,  were  probably  very  unworthy 
per.-ons.  But  that  did  not  p: event  our  Lord  hunou  iog  the 
Temple  ordinances  and  feasts. — It  does  not  however  foilow  !'rom 
this  thf  t  we  should  be  justified  in  habitually  going  to  hear  false 
doctrine  preached.     Our  Lord  never  did  this.- 

Let  it  be  noted,  that  none  of  the  four  Gospel-writers  speak 
80  much  of  our  Lord's  doings  in  Judaea  and  Jerusalem  as  St. 
John  does. 

2. — [There  is  at  Jerusalem^  These  words,  it  is  thought,  show 
that  Jerusalem  was  yet  standing,  and  not  taken  and  destroyed 
by  the  Romans,  when  John  wrote  his  Gospel.  Otherwise,  it  is 
argued,  he  would  have  said,  "  There  was  at  Jerusalem." 

[By  the  sheep-marJcef  a  pool]  Nothing  certain  is  known  about 
this  pool,  or  its  precise  situation.  Modern  travellers  have  p'O- 
fessed  to  point  out  where  it  was.  But  there  is  lirtle  groun  1  for 
determining  the  matter,  except  conjecture  and  tradition.  After 
all  the  changes  of  eighteen  centuries,  points  like  these  are  almost 
incapable  of  a  satisfactory  solution.  There  is  no  place  in  the 
world,  perhaps,  where  it  is  so  difficult  to  settle  anything  decid- 
edly about  ancient  buildings  and  sites  as  '  Jerusalem.  S jme 
propose  to  render  the  expression  "  sheep-market ''  the  "  sheep- 
gate,"  because  of  Nehemiah  iii.  1.  But  we  really  have  no  cer- 
tain ground  for  either  expression. 

[Cal.ed  in  the  Huhrew  tongue  Bethesda.]  The  word  "Bethesda," 
according  to  Cruden,  means  "  house  of  effusion,"  or  "  house  of 
pity  or  mercy."  It  is  not  mentioned  anywhere  else  in  the  Bible. 
The  mention  of  the  "  Hebrew  tongue,"  shows  again  that  John 
did  not  write  for  Jews  so  much  as  Gentiles. 

[Raving  Jive  porches.]  These  porches  were  probably  covered 
arcades,  piazzas,  colonnades,  or  verandas,  open  at  one  side  to 
the  air,  but  protected  against  the  sun  or  rain  over-head.  la  a 
hot  country  hke  Palestine,  such  buildings  are  very  necessary, 

3. — [In  the^e  lay  a  great  multitude.]  The  context  seems  to  show 
tliat  the  multituile  were  assembled  at  this  particular  feast  in  this 
place,  expecting  a  certain  miracle  to  be  wrought,  which  only 
took  place  at  tliis  particular  time  of  the  year. 

[  Impotent  folk  ]  This  expression  evidently  does  not  mean 
paralytic  people,  but  merely  people  who  were  sick  and  ilL  Tha 
mention  of  "  blind,  halt,  withered,"  shows  this. 


270  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

[Moving  of  the  luater.]  This  "  moving  "  must  have  been  some- 
thing that  could  be  seen  and  observed  by  persons  standing  by 
or  looking  on.  There  was  no  virtue  or  healing  element  in  the 
water,  until  the  movement  took  place. 

4. — [For  an  angel  went  down,  &c.]  The  thing  we  are  here  told  is 
very  curious.  There  is  nothing  like  it  in  the  Bible,  Josephu^, 
the  Jewish  writer,  does  not  mention  it.  The  simplest  view  is 
that  it  was  a  standing  miracle  wrought  once  every  year,  as  Cyril 
says,  or  at  any  rate  at  sonie  special  season  only,  by  God's  ap- 
pointment, to  keep  the  Jews  in  mind  of  the  wonderful  works 
that  had  been  done  for  them  in  time  past,  and  to  remind  them 
that  the  God  of  miracles  was  unchanged. — But  when  this  singu- 
lar miracle  first  began, — on  what  occasion  it  began, — why  we 
never  hear  anything  else  about  it, — in  what  way  the  angel 
came  down, — are  questions  which  cannot  be  answered. — That 
angels  did  interpose  in  a  miraculous  manner  in  the  days  of  the 
New  Testament,  is  perfectly  clear  fi-om  many  instances  in  the 
Gospels  and  Acts.  That  the  Jews  themselves  had  strong  faith 
in  the  interposition  of  angels  on  certain  occasions,  is  clear  from 
the  account  of  the  vision  of  Zacharias,  when  we  are  simply  told 
that  the  people  "perceived  that  he  had  seen  a  vision  in  the 
temple."'  (Luke  i.  22.)  That  from  the  days  of  Malachi,  when 
inspiration  ceased,  God  may  have  seen  it  good  to  keep  up  in  the 
Jewish  mind  a  faith  in  unseen  things,  by  the  grant  of  a  standing 
miracle,  is  a  very  probable  opinion.  The  wisest  course  is  to 
take  the  passage  as  we  find  it,  and  to  befieve  though  we  cannot 
explain. 

All  other  attempts  to  get  over  the  difficulties  of  the  passage 
are  thoroughly  unsatisfactory.  To  condemn  the  passage  as  not 
genuine,  is  a  lazy  way  of  cutting  the  knot,  and  not  at  all  clearly 
warranted  by  the  authority  of  manuscripts. — To  say  that  St. 
John  only  used  the  popular  language  of  tlie  Jews  in  describing 
the  miracle,  and  did  not  really  believe  it  himself,  is,  to  say  the 
least,  irreverent  and  profane. — To  suppose,  as  Hammond  and 
others  have  done,  that  the  "angel"  only  means  a  common 
human  "messenger"  sent  by  the  priests,  and  that  the  healing 
efl&cacy  of  the  water  arose  from  the  blood  of  the  many  sacrifices 
which  drained  into  the  pool  of  Bethe.^da  at  the  pa'^sover  feast; — • 
or  to  suppose,  as  others,  that  Bethesda  was  a  p.iol  where  sacri- 
fices were  washed  before  they  were  offered,  are  all  entirely  gra- 
tuitous assumptions,  and  do  not  get  over  the  main  difficulty. 
There  is  no  proof  that  the  blood  of  the  sacrifices  did  drain  into 
the  pool.  There  is  no  proof  that  the  blood  would  give  the  water 
any  healing  virtue.  There  is  no  proof,  as  Liuht^oot  shows,  that 
sacrilices  were  waahed  at  all.  (See  Light  foot's  Exeroitations  on 
John,  on  this  passage.)  Moreover,  this  hypothesis  would  not 
account  for  only  one  person  being  healed  every  time  the  waters 


JOHN,    CHAP.    V.  271 

were  "  tro  ibled,"  or  for  St.  John's  mention  of  tlie  "  angel  trou- 
bling "  the  waters.  Here,  as  in  many  other  instances,  the  sim- 
plest view,  and  the  one  which  involves  the  fewest  difficulties,  is 
to  take  the  passage  as  we  find  it,  and  to  interpret  it  as  narrating 
an  actual  fact, — viz.  :  a  standing  miracle  which  actually  was 
literally  wrought  at  a  certain  season,  and  perhaps  every  year. 

After  all  there  is  no  more  real  difficulty  iti  the  account  before 
us,  than  in  the  history  of  our  Lord's  temptation  in  the  wilder- 
ness, the  various  cases  of  Satanic  possession,  or  the  release  of 
Peter  from  prison  by  an  angel.  Once  admit  the  existence  of 
angels,  their  ministry  on  earth,  and  the  possibiUty  of  their  inter- 
position to  carry  out  God's  designs,  and  there  is  nothing  that 
ought  to  stumble  us  in  the  passage.  The  true  secret  of  some  of 
the  objections  to  it,  is  the  modern  tendency  to  regard  all  miracles 
as  useless  lumber,  which  must  be  thrown  overboard,  if  possible, 
and  cast  out  of  the  Sacred  Narrative  on  every  occasion.  Against 
this  tendency  we  must  watch  and  be  on  our  guard. 

Rollock  remarks,  "  The  Jewish  people  at  this  time  was  in  a 
state  of  great  confusion,  and  the  presence  of  God  was  in  great 
measure  withdrawn  from  it.  The  prophets  whom  God  had  been 
accustomed  to  raise  up  for  extraordinary  purpose^,  were  no 
longer  given  to  the  Jews.  Therefore  God,  that  He  might  not 
appear  altogether  to  cast  off  His  people,  was  willing  to  heal 
some  miraculously,  and  in  an  extraordinary  way,  in  order  that 
He  might  testify  to  the  world  that  the  nation  was  not  yet  en- 
tirely rejected."     Brentius  and  Calvin  say  much  the  same. 

Poole  thinks  that  this  miracle  only  began  a  little  before  the 
birth  of  Christ,  "as  a  figure  of  him  being  about  to  come,  who 
was  to  be  a  fountain  opened  to  the  house  of  David."  Lightfoot 
takes  the  same  view. 

[Troubled  the  water.]  This  means,  no  doubt,  "  disturbed,  agi- 
tated, stirred  up,"  the  water  of  the  pool.  There  is  no  reason  foi 
supposing  that  the  angel  visibly  appeared  in  doing  this.  It  is 
enough  to  suppose  that  at  a  certain  hour  there  was  a  sudden  stir 
and  agitation  of  the  waters,  immediately  after  which  tliey  pos- 
sessed the  miraculous  virtue  of  healing, — just  as  Ihe  waters  at 
Marah  became  sweet  i:amediately  after  Moses  cast  the  tree  into 
them.  (Exod.  xv.  25.) 

[  WTiosoever  then  first. \  This  shows  that  the  whole  affair  was  mi- 
raculous. On  no  other  supposition  can  we  account  for  only  one 
person,  being  healed  after  the  troubling  of  the  water.  That  only 
"  one"  was  healed,  is  plain,  I  think,  from  the  wording  of  the  passage 

[Of  whatsoever  dismse  he  had.]  These  words  would  be  more 
literally  translated,  "  with  whatsoever  disease  he  was  held." 

Bengel  thinks  that  the  use  of  the  past  t(ms3  throughout;  this 


272  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

verse  shows  that  the  miracle  had  ceased  when  John  wrote.  He 
"used  to  go  down,"— ''used  to  trouble  the  waters,"  &c.  Ter- 
tullian  declares  expressly  that  the  miracle  ceased  from  the  timo 
that  the  Jews  rejected  Christ. 

5. — [^Infirmity  thirty  and  eight  years.']  This  means  the  length  of 
time  during  which  the  sick  man  had  been  ilL  How  old  he  was 
we  do  not  know. 

Baxter  remarks,  "  How  great  a  mercy  is  it  to  live  eight  and 
thirty  years  under  God's  wholesome  discipline !  0  my  Grod,  I 
thank  Thee  for  the  hke  disciphne  of  eight  and  fifty  years.  How  safe 
a  life  is  this  compared  to  one  spent  in  full  prosperity  and  pleasure  !" 

Those  who  see  typical  and  abstruse  meanings  in  all  the  least 
details  of  the  narratives  of  Scriptures,  observe  that  thirty-eight 
years  was  the  exact  time  of  Israel's  wanderings  in  the  wilderness. 
They  see  in  the  sick  man, — helpless  and  hopeless  till  Christ 
came, — a  type  of  the  Jewish  Church.  The  pool  of  Bethesda  is 
Old  Testament  religion.  The  smaU  benefit  it  conferred, — viz. : 
only  healing  one  at  a  time,  represents  the  narrow  and  limited 
benefit  which  Judaism  conferred  on  mankind.  The  merciful 
interference  of  Christ  on  the  sick  man's  behalf,  represents  the 
bringing  in  of  the  Gospel  for  all  the  world.  These  are  pious 
thoughts,  but  it  may  well  be  doubted  whether  there  is  any 
warrant  for  them. 

The  notions  that  the  pool  of  Bethesda  was  a  type  of  baptism, 
and  the  five  porches  typical  of  the  five  books  of  the  law,  or  the 
five  wounds  of  Christ,  appear  to  me  mere  ingenious  inventions 
of  man,  without  any  solid  foundation.  Yet  Chrysostom,  Augus- 
tine, Theophylact,  Euthymius,  Burgon,  Wordsworth,  ar:d  many 
others,  maintain  them.  Those  who  wish  to  see  a  fuU  reply  to  the 
theory,  that  the  miracle  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda  is  a  typical  proof 
of  the  doctrine  of  baptismal  regeneration,  will  find  it  in  Gomarus, 
the  Dutch  divine.  He  takes  up  Bellarmine's  argument  on  th« 
subject,  and  anwers  him  completely. 

6. — [When  Jesus  saw. ..knew..  Jong  time^^  We  need  not  doubt  that 
our  Lord  knew  this  man's  history  by  that  divine  knowledge 
which,  as  God,  He  possesses  of  all  things  in  heaven  and  earth. 
To  suppose  that  He  ascertained  by  inquiry  the  state  of  his  case 
before  speaking  to  him,  is  a  weak,  meagre,  and  frigid  interpre- 
tation. As  a  practical  truth,  it  is  a  most  comfortable  doctrine  that 
Jesus  knows  every  sickness  and  disease,  and  all  its  weary  history. 
Nothing  is  hid  from  Him. 

[He  said  unto  him.']  This  is  an  example  of  our  Lord  being  the 
first  to  speak  and  begin  conversation,  as  He  did  with  the  woman 
of  Samaria.  (John  iv,  7.)  Unasked,  unsolicited,  unexpectedly, 
He  mercifully  addressed  the  sick  man.     No  doubt  He  always 


JOHN   CHAP,  y,  273 

begins  in  man's  heart  .before  man  begins  with  Him.  But  He 
does  all  things,  as  a  Sovereign,  according  to  His  own  will;  and 
it  is  not  always  that  we  see  Him  taking  the  first  step  so  entirely 
of  Himself,  as  we  do  here. 

[Wilt  thou  be  made  whole?]  The  English  language  here  fails 
to  give  the  fuU  force  of  the  Greek.  It  means,  "Hast  thou  a 
will?  Dost  tho.1  wish?  Dost  thou  desire  to  be  made  whole?" 
The  question  was  perhaps  meant  to  awaken  desire  and  expecta- 
tion in  the  man,  aad  to  prepare  him  in  some  sense  for  the  bless- 
ing about  to  be  bestowed  on  him. 

Is  not  this,  to  take  a  spiritual  view,  the  very  language  that 
Christ  is  continually  addressing  to  every  man  and  woman  who 
hears  His  Gospel  ?  He  sees  us  in  a  wretched,  miserable,  sin-sick 
condition.  The  one  thing  He  asks  us  is,  "  Hast  thou  any 
wish  to  be  saved  ?  " 

7. — [The  impotent  man  ansiuered^  him,  Sir.]  The  word  rendered 
"Sir"  is  the  same  that  is  more  commonly  rendered  "Lord."  It 
is  the  same  that  is  rendered  "  Sir  "  aJl  through  the  fourth  chap- 
ter, in  the  history  of  the  Samaritan  woman. 

[/  have  no  man... .put  me  into  the  pool.]  This  is  no  doubt 
mentioned  as  an  intentional  proof  of  the  heartlessness  and  un- 
kindness  of  human  nature.  Think  of  a  poor  invalid  waiting  for 
years  by  the  water,  and  having  not  a  single  friend  to  help  him! 
The  longer  we  live  on  earth  the  more  we  shall  find  that  it  is  a 
selfish  world,  and  that  the  sick  and  afflicted  have  few  real  friends 
in  time  of  need.  "  The  poor  is  hated  even  of  his  neighbour." 
(Prov.  xiv.  20.)  Christ  is  the  only  unfailing  friend  of  the  friend- 
less and  helper  of  the  helpless. 

B. — [Rise,  taJce  up  thy  bed  and  walk.]  Here,  as  in  other  similar  cases, 
it  is  evident  that  miraculous  healing  power  went  forth  with  the 
words  of  our  Lord.  Thus,  "  Stretch  forth  thy  hand  "  (Mark  iii. 
5) ;  "  Go  show  yourselves  to  the  priests  "  (Luke  xvii.  14).  Com- 
mands like  these  tested  the  faith  and  obedience  of  those  to 
whom  they  were  given.  How  could  they  possibly  do  the  things 
commanded,  if  impotent,  like  the  man  before  us  ?  Where  the 
use  of  doing  them,  if  stili  covered  with  leprosy,  like  the  ten 
lepers?  But  it  was  precisely  in  the  act  of  obedience  that  the 
blessing  came.  The  whole  power  is  Christ's.  But  He  loves  to 
make  us  exert  ourselves,  and  show  our  obedience  and  faith. 

-  Augustine  finds  in  the  command,  "  Take  up  thy  bed,"  au 
exhortation  to  the  love  of  our  nei^-hbours,  because  we  are  to  bear 
one  another's  burdens;  and  in  the  command,  "  walk,"  an  exhor- 
tatio.i  to  love  God  !  Such  allegorizing  appears  to  me  very  un- 
warrantable, and  calculated  to  bring  the  Bible  into  contempt^ 
as  a  book  that  can  be  made  to  mean  anything. 
12*^ 


274  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

9. — [Immediately.... made  whole,.. ..ivalked.]  Here  we  see  the  reality 
of  the  miracle  wrought.  Nothing  but  Divine  power  could  enable 
one  who  had  been  a  cripple  for  so  many  years  to  move  his  limbs 
znd  carry  a  burden  all  at  once.  But  it  was  as  easy  to  our  Lord 
to  give  immediate  strength  as  it  was  to  create  muscles,  nerves, 
and  sinews  in  the  day  that  Adam  was  made. 

When  we  are  told  that  the  man  "  took  up  his  bed,"  we  must 
remember  that  this  probably  was  nothing  more  than  a  light 
mattress,  carpet,  or  thick  cloth,  such  as  is  commonly  used  in  hot 
countries  for  sleeping  on. 
10. — [The  Jews.]  Here,  as  in  many  places  in  St.  John's  Gospel, 
the  expression,  "  the  Jews,"  when  used  of  the  Jews  at  Jerusalem, 
means  the  leaders  of  the  people, — elders,  ruleis,  and  scribes. 
It  does  not  mean  vaguely  the  "Jewish  crowd"  around  our  Lord, 
but  the  representatives  of  the  whole  nation, — the  heads  of  Israel 
at  the  time. 

[It  is  not  lawful.... carry hed.]     In  support  of  this  charge  of 

unlawfulness,  the  Jews  would  allege  not  merely  the  general  law 
of  the  fourth  commandment,  but  the  special  passages  in  Nehemiah 
and  Jeremiah,  about  "  bearing  no  burden  "  on  the  Sabbath  day. 
(Neh.  xiii.  19 ;  Jer.  xvii.  21.)  But  they  could  not  have  proved  that 
these  passages  appHed  to  the  case  of  the  man  before  them. — For 
a  man  to  carry  merchandise  and  wares  on  the  Sabbath  was  one 
thing.  For  a  sick  man,  suddenly  and  miraculously  healed,  to  walk 
away  to  his  home,  carrying  his  mattress,  was  quite  another. — To 
forbid  the  one  man  to  carry  his  burden  was  Scriptural  and  lawful. 
To  forbid  the  other  was  cruel,  and  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  the  law 
of  Moses. — The  act  of  the  one  man  was  unnecessary.  The  act 
of  the  other  was  an  act  of  necessity  and  mercy. — It  might  per- 
haps be  urged  in  defence  of  the  Jews,  that  they  only  saw  a  man 
carrying  off  a  burden,  and  knew  nothing  of  his  previous  illness 
or  his  cure.  But  when  we  remember  the  many  instances  re- 
corded in  the  Gospels  of  their  extreme  and  harsh  interpretation  of 
the  fourth  commandment,  it  is  doubtful  whether  this  plea  will  stand. 

11. — [He  that  made  me  whole  the  same  said,  etc.]  The  answer  of  the 
man  seems  simple.  But  it  contains  a  deep  principle.  "  He  that 
has  done  so  great  a  thing  to  me  was  surely  to  be  obeyed,  when 
He  told  me  to  take  up  my  bed.  If  He  had  authority  and  power 
to  heal,  He  was  not  likely  to  lay  upon  me  an  unlawful  command. 
I  only  obeyed  him  who  cured  me."  If  Christ  has  really  healed 
our  souls,  should  not  this  be  our  feeling  toward  Him  ? — ''  Thou 
hast  healed  me.     What  thou  commandest  I  will  do." 

12. — [  What  man  is  he  which  said,...Talce  vp  thy  hed,  etc.]  Ecolampa- 
dius,  Grotius,  and  many  others,  remark  what  an  example  this 
question  is  of  the  malevolent  and  malicious  spirit  of  the  Jews. 
Instead  of  asking,  "  who  healed  thee  ?"  they  asked  "  who  told 


JOHN,    CHAP.   V.  275 

thee  to  carry  thy  bed  ?"  They  cared  not  for  knowing  what  they 
might  admire  as  a  work  of  mercy,  but  what  they  might  make 
ihe  ground  of  an  accusation.  How  many  arc  hke  them !  They 
are  always  looking  out  for  something  to  find  fault  with. 

13. — [Wist  not  who  it  was.]  It  is  most  probable  that  the  cripple 
really  knew  not  who  it  was  that  had  healed  him,  and  had  only 
seen  our  Lord  that  day  for  the  first  time.  He  was  ignorant  of 
His  name,  and  only  knew  Him  as  a  kind  person,  who  came  up 
and  said  suddenly, "  Wilt  thou  be  made  whole  ?"  and,  after 
curing  him  miraculously,  suddenly  disappeared  in  the  crowd. 

[Conveyed  himself  away.]  The  Greek  word  so  rendered  ia 
peculiar,  and  only  found  in  this  place.  Parkhurst  thinks  that  it 
simply  means  "  departed,  or  went  away."  Schleusner  says  that 
the  root  of  the  idea  is,  "  swimming  out,  or  escaping  by  swim- 
ming," and  that  the  meaning  here  is,  "withdrew  himself  secretly 
from  the  crowd  that  was  in  the  place."  If  so,  it  is  not  improba- 
ble that,  as  in  Luke  iv.  30,  at  Nazareth,  and  John  x.  39,  in  the 
Temple,  our  Lord  put  forth  a  miraculous  power  in  passing  or 
gliding  through  the  crowd  without  being  observed  or  stopped. 
l-t. — [Afterward.. ..temple.]  It  is  not  clear  how  long  a  time  elapsed 
before  our  Lord  found  the  man  whom  He  had  healed  in  the 
Temple.  If  the  theory  be  correct  to  which  I  adverted  in  the 
note  on  the  first  verse,  there  must  have  been  an  interval.  The 
word  "  afterwards  "  is  literally  "  after  these  things." 

Chrysostom  thinks  that  the  circumstance  of  the  man  being 
found  "  in  the  temple  "  is  an  indication  of  his  piety. 

[Behold  thou  art  made  whole :  sin  no  more,  etc.]  These  words 
appear  to  point  at  something  more  than  meets  the  eye.  They  are 
a  solemn  caution.  One  might  fancy  that  our  Lord  knew  that 
some  sin  had  been  the  beginning  of  the  man's  illness,  and  that 
he  meant  to  remind  him  of  it.  It  certainly  seems  very  unlikely 
that  our  Lord  would  say  broadly  and  vaguely,  "  sin  no  more," 
unless  he  spoke  with  a  significant  reference  to  some  sin  which 
had  been  the  primary  cause  of  this  man's  long  illness.  (See  1  Cor. 
xi.  30.)  There  are  sins  wliich  bring  their  own  punishments  on 
men's  bodies ;  and  I  am  strongly  disposed  to  think  that  it  may 
have  been  the  case  with  this  man.  The  expression,  "  a  worse 
thing,"  would  then  come  out  with  more  force.  It  would  be  "  a 
heavier  visitation," — a  worse  judgment, — even  than  this  thirty- 
eight  years'  illness.  A  sick  bed  is  a  sorrowful  place,  but  hell  is 
much  worse. 

Besser  remarks, — "It  is  a  dreadful  thing,  when  the  correction 
and  mercy  of  Divine  love  wearies  itself  with  a  man  in  va'n.  You 
that  are  sick,  write  over  your  beds,  when  you  rise  up  from  them 
in  renewed  health, — '  Behold  thou  art  made  whole ;  sin  no  more, 
lest  a  worse  thing  come  unto  thee.'  "  Brentius  says  much  the  same, 


276 


EXPOSIVORY  THOUGHTS. 


If  sin  was  the  cause  of  this  man's  disease,  and  he  had  been  ill 
from  the  effects  of  it  thirty  and  eight  years,  it  is  plain  that  it  must 
have  been  committed  before  our  Lord  was  born  !  It  is  an  instance, 
in  that  case,  of  our  Lord's  perfect  and  Divine  knowledge  of  all 
things,  past  as  well  as  future. 
15. — [Departed  and  told  the  Jews.']  There  is  no  proof  that  the  man 
did  this  with  anj  evil  design.  Born  a  Jew,  and  taught  to  rever- 
ence his  rulers  and  elders,  he  naturally  wished  to  give  them  the 
information  they  desired,  and  had  no  reason  to  suppose,  for  any- 
thing we  can  see,  that  it  would  injure  his  Benefactor. 


JOHN  Y.  16—23. 


16  And  therefore  did  the  Jews 
persecute  Jesus,  and  sought  to  slay 
him,  because  he  had  done  those 
things  on  the  sabbath  day. 

17  But  Jesus  answered  them,  My 
Father  worketh  hitherto,  and  I  work. 

18  Therefore  the  Jews  sought 
the  more  to  kill  him,  because  he  not 
only  had  broken  the  sabbath,  but 
said  also  that  God  was  his  Father, 
making  lumself  equal  with  God. 

19  Then  answered  Jesus  and  said 
unto  them,  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto 
you,  the  Son  can  do  nothing  of  him- 
self, but  what  he  seeth  the  Father 
do :  for  what  things  soever  he  doeth, 
these  also  doeth  the  Son  hkewise. 


20  For  the  Father  loveth  the 
Son,  and  sheweth  him  all  things  that 
himself  doeth :  and  he  will  shew  him 
greater  works  than  these,  that  ye 
may  marvel. 

21  For  as  the  Father  raiseth  up 
the  dead,  and  quickeneth/Aem;  even 
so  the  Son  quickeneth  whom  he 
will. 

22  For  the  Father  judgeth  no 
man,  but  hath  committed  all  judg- 
ment unto  the  Son : 

23  That  all  men  should  honour 
the  Son,  even  as  they  honour  the 
Father.  He  that  honoureth  not  the 
Son  honoureth  not  the  Father  which 
hath  sent  him. 


These  verses  begin  one  of  the  most  deep  and  solemn  pas- 
gages  in  the  four  Gospels.  They  show  us  the  Lord  Jesus 
asserting  His  own  Divine  nature,  His  unity  with  God  the 
Father,  and  the  high  dignity  of  His  office.  Nowhere  does 
pur  Lord  dwell  so  fully  on  these  subjects  as  in  the  chapter 
before  us.  And  nowhere,  we  must  confess,  do  we  find  out 
60  thoroughly  the  weakness  of  man's  understanding !  There 
is  much,  we  must  all  feel,  that  is  far  beyond  our  compre- 
hension in  our  Lord's  account  of  Himself.  Such  knowledge, 
in  short,  is  too  wonderful  for  us.  *'  It  is  high  :  we  cannot 
attain  unto  it."  (Psalm  cxxxix.  6,)  How  often  men  say 
that  they  want  clear  explanations  of  sueh  doctrines  as  the 


JOHN,    CHAP.    V.  277 

Trinity.  Yet  here  we  have  our  Lord  handling  the  subject 
of  His  own  Person,  and,  behold !  we  cannot  follow  Him. 
We  seem  only  to  touch  His  meaning  with  the  tip  of  our 
fingers. 

We  learn,  for  one  thing,  from  the  verses  before  us,  that 
there  are  some  works  which  it  is  lawful  to  do  on  the  Sabbath 
day. 

The  Jews,  as  on  many  other  occasions,  found  fault  be- 
cause Jesus  healed  a  man  who  had  been  ill  for  thirty-eight 
years,  on  the  Sabbath.  They  charged  our  Lord  with  a 
breach  of  the  fourth  commandment. 

Our  Lord's  reply  to  the  Jews  is  very  remarkable.  "  My 
Father,"  he  says,  "  worketh  hitherto,  and  I  also  work." 
It  is  as  though  He  said  : — "  Though  my  Father  rested  on 
the  seventh  day  from  His  work  of  creation,  He  has  never 
rested  for  a  moment  from  His  providential  government  of 
the  world,  and  from  His  merciful  work  of  supplying  the 
daily  wants  of  all  His  creatures.  Were  He  to  rest  from 
such  work,  the  whole  frame  of  nature  would  stand  still. 
And  I  also  work  works  of  mercy  on  the  Sabbath  day.  I 
do  not  break  the  fourth  commandment  when  I  heal  the 
sick,  any  more  than  my  Father  breaks  it  when  He  causes 
the  sun  to  rise  and  the  grass  to  grow  on  the  Sabbath." 

We  must  distinctly  understand,  that  neither  here  nor 
elsewhere  does  the  Lord  Jesus  overthrow  the  obligation  of 
the  fourth  commandment.  Neither  here  nor  elsewhere  is 
there  a  word  to  justify  the  vague  assertions  of  some 
modern  teachers,  that  "  Christians  ought  not  to  keep  a 
Sabbath,"  and  that  it  is  "  a  Jewish  institution  which  has 
passed  away."  The  utmost  that  our  Lord  does,  is  to  place 
the  claims  of  the  Sabbath  on  the  right  foundation.  He 
clears  the  day  of  rest  from  the  false  and  superstitious 
teaching  of  the  Jews,  about  the  right  way  of  observing  it. 
He  shows  us  clearly  that  works  of  necessity  and  works  of 
mercy  are  no  breach  of  the  fourth  commandment. 


278  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

After  all,  the  errors  of  Christians  on  this  subject,  in 
these  latter  days,  are  of  a  very  different  kind  from  those 
of  the  Jews.  There  is  little  danger  of  men  keeping  the 
Sabbath  too  strictly.  The  thing  to  be  feared  is  the  dispo- 
sition to  keep  it  loosely  and  partially,  or  not  to  keep  it  at 
all.  The  tendency  of  the  age  is  not  to  exaggerate  the 
fourth  commandment,  but  to  cut  it  out  of  the  Decalogue, 
and  throw  it  aside  altogether.  Against  this  tendency  it 
becomes  us  all  to  be  on  our  guard.  The  experience  of 
eighteen  centuries  supplies  abundant  proofs  that  vital 
religion  never  flourishes  when  the  Sabbath  is  not  well  kept. 

We  learn,  for  another  thing,  from  these  verses,  the 
dignity  and  greatness  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

The  Jews,  we  are  told,  sought  to  kill  Jesus  because  He 
said  "  that  God  was  his  Father,  making  himself  equal  with 
God."  Our  Lord,  in  reply,  on  this  special  occasion,  enters 
very  fully  into  the  question  of  His  own  Divine  nature.  In 
reading  His  words,  we  must  all  feel  that  we  are  reading 
mysterious  things,  and  treading  on  very  holy  ground.  But 
we  must  feel  a  deep  conviction,  however  little  we  may 
understand,  that  the  things  He  says  could  never  have  been 
said  by  one  who  was  only  man.  The  Speaker  is  nothing 
less  than  "  God  manifest  in  the  flesh.  (1  Tim.  iii.  16.) 

He  asserts  His  own  unity  with  God  the  Father.  No 
other  reasonable  meaning  can  be  put  on  the  expressions, 
— "  The  Son  can  do  nothing  of  himself,  but  what  he  seeth 
the  Father  do :  for  what  things  soever  he  doeth,  these  also 
doeth  the  Son  likewise. — The  Father  loveth  the  Son,  and 
showeth  him  all  things  that  himself  doeth."  Such  lan- 
guage, however  deep  and  high,  appears  to  mean  that  in 
operation,  and  knowledge,  and  heart,  and  will,  the  Father 
and  the  Son  are  One, — two  Persons,  but  one  God.  Truths 
such  as  these  are  of  course  beyond  man's  power  to  explain 
particularly.  Enough  for  us  to  believe  and  rest  upon  them. 

He  asserts,  in  the  next  place.  His  own  Divine  power  to 


JOHN,    CHAP    V.  279 

gi»  e  life.  He  tells  us,  "The  Son  qiiickeneth  whom  he  will." 
Lir^  is  tlie  highest  and  greatest  gift  that  can  be  bestowed. 
It  is  precisely  that  thing  that  man,  with  all  his  cleverness, 
can  neither  give  to  the  work  of  his  hands,  nor  restore  when 
taken  away.  But  life,  we  are  told,  is  in  the  hands  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,  to  bestow  and  give  at  His  discretion.  Dead 
bodies  and  dead  souls  are  both  alike  under  His  dominion. 
He  has  the  keys  of  death  and  hell.  In  Him  is  life.  He  is 
the  life.  (Jolin  i.  4.     Rev.  i.  18.) 

He  asserts,  in  the  last  place.  His  own  authority  to  judge 
the  world.  "  The  Father,"  we  are  told,  "  has  committed 
all  judgment  unto  the  Son."  All  power  and  authority 
over  the  world  is  committed  to  Christ's  hands.  He  is  the 
King  and  the  Judge  of  mankind.  Before  Him  every  knee 
shall  bow,  and  every  tongue  shall  confess  that  he  is  Lord. 
He  that  was  once  despised  and  rejected  of  man,  condemned 
and  crucified  as  a  malefactor,  shall  one  day  hold  a  great 
assize,  and  judge  all  the  world.  "  God  shall  judge  the 
secrets  of  man  by  Jesus  Christ.''  (Rom.  ii.  16.) 

And  now  let  us  think  whether  it  is  possible  to  make  too 
much  of  Christ  in  our  religion.  If  we  have  ever  thought 
so,  let  us  cast  aside  the  thought  for  ever.  Both  in  His  Own 
nature  as  God,  and  in  His  ofiice  as  commissioned  Mediator, 
He  is  worthy  of  all  honour.  He  that  is  one  with  the 
Father, — the  Giver  of  life, — the  King  of  kings, — the 
coming  Judge,  can  never  be  too  much  exalted.  "  He  that 
honoureth  not  the  Son,  honoureth  not  the  Father  that 
sent  him." 

If  we  desire  salvation,  let  us  lean  our  whole  weight  on 
this  mighty  Saviour.  So  leaning,  we  never  need  be  afraid. 
Christ  is  the  rock  of  ages,  and  he  that  builds  on  Him  shall 
never  be  confounded, — neither  in  sickness,  nor  in  death, 
nor  in  the  judgment-day.  The  hand  that  was  nailed  to  the 
cross  is  almighty.  The  Saviour  of  sinners  is  *'  mighty  to 
save."  (Isaiah  Ixiii.  1.^ 


280  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 


Notes.     John  V.  16—23. 

\Q,—-{^Thi>ref ore... Jews  persecute^  etc.]  The  verbs  in  this  verse  are 
all  in  the  imperfect  tense.  It  may  be  doubted  whether  the  mean- 
ing is  not,  strictly  speaking,  something  of  this  kind  : — "  The  Jewa 
from  this  time  began  to  persecute  Jesus,  and  vi^ere  always  seek- 
ing to  Siay  Him,  because  He  made  a  habit  of  doing  these  things 
on  the  Sabbath  day."  It  is  some  confirmation  of  this  view  that 
our  Lord  at  a  much  later  period  refers  to  this  very  miracle  at 
Bethesda,  as  a  thing  which  had  specially  angered  the  Jews  of 
Jerusalem,  and  for  which  they  hated  Him  and  sought  still  to  kill 
Him.  It  was  long  after  the  time  of  this  miracle  when  He  said, — 
*'  Are  ye  angry  at  me,  because  I  have  made  a  man  every  whit 
whole  on  the  Sabbath  day  ?  "  (John  vii.  23.) 

17. — [But  Jesus  answered.]  This  seems  to  have  been  the  first  reply 
which  our  Lord  made  wheo  charged  with  breaking  the  fourth 
commandment.  It  was  a  short,  simple  justification  of  the  law- 
fulness of  doing  works  of  mercy  on  the  Sabbath.  There  seems 
to  have  been  an  interval  between  this  reply  and  the  long  argu- 
mentative defence  which  begins  in  the  19th  verse. 

[^fy  Father  worJceth  hitherto,  and  I  also  work.]  The  words 
rendered  "hitherto,"  are,  literally,  "until  now," — that  is,  from 
the  beginning  of  creation  up  to  the  present  time. 

I  can  only  see  one  meaning  in  this  pithy  sentence: — "My 
Father  in  heaven  is  continually  working  works  of  mercy  and 
kindness  in  His  providential  government  of  the  world,  in  supply- 
ing the  wants  of  all  His  creatures,  in  maintainmg  the  whole 
fabric  of  the  earth  in  perfection,  in  giving  rain  from  heaven  and 
fruitful  seasons,  in  preserving  and  sustaining  life.  All  this  He 
does  on  Sabbaths,  as  well  as  week  days.  Were  He  to  cease  from 
such  works,  the  whole  world  would  be  full  of  confusion.  When 
He  rested  from  His  works  of  creation  He  did  not  rest  from  His 
works  of  providence.  I  also,  who  am  His  beloved  Son,  claim  the 
right  to  work  works  of  mercy  on  the  Sabbath.  In  working 
such  works  I  do  not  break  the  Sabbath  any  more  than  My  Fa- 
ther does.  My  Father  appointed  the  fourth  commandment  to  be 
honoured,  and  yet  never  ceased  to  cause  the  sun  to  rise  and  the 
grass  to  grow  on  the  Sabbath.  I  also,  who  claim  to  be  One  with 
the  Father,  honour  the  Sabbath,  but  I  do  not  abstain  from  works 
of  mercy  upon  it." 

Two  things  should  be  observed  in  this  sentence.  One  is  the 
plain  practical  lesson  that  the  Sabbath  w^as  not  meant  to  be  a 
day  of  total  idleness,  and  of  entire  cessation  from  all  kinds  and 
sorts  of  work.  "  The  Sabbath  was  made  for  man," — for  his 
benefit,  comfort,  and  advantage.     Works  of  mercy  and  of  real 


JOHN,    CHAP.    V.  281 

necessity  to  man's  life  and  animal  existence  on  the  Sabbath  day, 
were  never  intended  to  be  forbidden. — The  other  thing  to  be 
observed  is  our  Lord's  assertion  of  His  own  Divinity  and  equality 
with  God  the  Father.  When  He  said,  "  My  Father  worketh, 
and  I  also  work/'  He  evidently  meant  much  more  than  bringing 
forward  His  Fatlier's  example,  though  that  of  course  is  con- 
tained in  His  argument,  and  justifies  all  Christians  in  doing 
works  of  mercy  on  Sundays.  What  He  meant  was,  ''  I  am  the 
beloved  Son  of  God :  I  and  My  Father  are  one  in  essence, 
dignity,  honour,  and  authority ;  whatever  He  does  I  also  do, 
and  have  right  to  do.  He  works  and  I  also  work.  He  gave  you 
the  Sabbath,  and  it  is  His  day.  I  too,  as  one  with  Him,  am 
Lord  of  the  Sabbath."  That  the  Jews  saw  this  to  be  the 
meaning  of  His  words  seems  clear  from  the  next  verse. 

Chrysostom  remarks  on  this  verse  : — "  If  any  one  say,  '  How 
doth  the  Father  ivorh,  who  ceased  on  the  seventh  day  from  all 
His  works  ? '  let  him  learn  the  manner  in  which  He  worketh. 
What  is  it  ?  He  careth  for,  He  holdeth  together  all  that  hath 
been  made.  When  thou  beholdest  the  sun  rising,  and  the  moon 
running  in  her  path,  the  lakes,  the  fountains,  the  rivers,  the 
rains,  the  course  of  nature  in  seeds,  and  in  our  own  bodies  and 
those  of  irrational  beings,  and  all  the  rest,  by  means  of  wliich 
this  universe  is  made  up,  then  learn  the  ceaseless  working  of 
the  Father."  (Matt.  v.  45 ;  vi.  30.) 

Schottgen  quotes  a  remarkable  saying  of  Philo  Judaeus, — 
"  God  never  ceases  to  work.  Just  as  it  is  the  property  of  fire  to 
burn  and  of  snow  to  be  cold,  so  is  it  the  property  of  God  to 
work." 

Ferus  remarks  on  the  great  variety  of  arguments  used  by  our 
Lord  on  various  occasions,  in  reply  to  the  superstitious  views  of 
the  Jews  about  the  Sabbath.  One  time  He  adduces  the  example 
of  David  eating  the  shew-bread,  another  time  the  example  of 
the  priests  working  in  the  Temple  on  the  Sabbath,  another  time 
the  readiness  of  the  Jews  to  help  an  ox  out  of  a  pit  on  the  Sab- 
bath. All  these  arguments  were  used  in  defence  of  works  of 
necessity  and  mercy.  Here  He  takes  higher  ground  still, — the 
example  of  His  Father. 
18. — [Therefore  the  Jews  sought  the  more  to  Jcill  him.]  This  short  de- 
fence which  our  Lord  made  seems  to  have  rankled  in  the  minds 
of  the  Jews,  and  to  have  made  them  even  more  bitter  against 
Him.  What  length  of  time  is  covered  by  this  verse  is  not  very 
plain.  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  it  implies  some  little  pause 
between  the  17th  and  19th  verses.  Here  again,  as  in  the  16th 
verse,  we  have  the  imperfect  tense  all  the  way  through.  It  must 
surely  pomt  at  something  of  habit,  both  in  the  designs  of  the 
Jews  itgainst  our  Lord,  and  in  our  Lord's  conduct,  and  in.  Hia 
language  about  His  Father. 


282  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

[Said  God...his  Father. ..equal  with  God.^  It  is  clear  that  our 
Lord's  words  about  His  Son  ship  struck  the  Jew5  in  a  far  more  for- 
cible way  than  ihey  seem  to  strike  us.  In  a  certain  sense  all 
believers  are  "  sons  of  God."  (Rom,  viii.  14.)  Bat  it  is  evident 
that  they  are  not  so  in  the  sense  that  our  Lord  meant  when  He 
talked  of  God  as  His  Father,  and  Himself  as  God's  Son.  The 
Greek  undoubtedly  might  be  translated  more  clearly,  "said  that 
God  was  His  own  particular  Father."  (Compare  Rom.  viii.  32). 
The  Jews  at  any  rate  accepted  the  words  as  meaning  our  Lord 
to  assert  His  own  peculiar  Sonship,  and  His  consequent  entire 
equality  with  God  the  Father.  Their  charge  and  ground  of  anger 
against  Him  amounted  to  this  : — "  Thou  callest  God  Thine  own 
particular  Father,  and  claimest  authority  to  do  whatsoever  He 
does.  By  so  doing  Thou  makest  Thyself  equal  with  God."  And 
our  Lord  seems  to  have  accepted  this  charge  as  a  correct  state- 
ment of  the  case,  and  to  have  proceeded  to  argue  that  He  had 
a  right  to  say  what  He  had  said,  and  that  He  really  was  equal 
with  God.  As  St.  Paul  says, — "  He  thought  it  not  robbery  to 
be  equal  with  God."  (Phil.  ii.  6.) 

Augustine  remarks, — "  Behold  the  Jews  understood  what  the 
Arians  would  not  understand." 

Whitby  remarks  that  the  Jews  never  accused  our  Lord  of 
blasphemy  for  saying  that  he  was  the  Messiah,  but  for  saying 
that  He  was  the  Son  of  God,  because  they  did  not  beUeve  that 
Messiah  when  He  appeared  was  to  be  a  Divine  Person. 

Ferus  remarks  that  the  Jews  probably  took  notice  of  our  Lord 
calling  God  "  My  Father,"  and  not  "  our  Father." — CartwrJght 
also  thinks  that  there  is  much  weight  in  the  expression  *'my," 
and  that  the  Jews  gathered  from  it  that  Christ  claimed  to  be  the 
only -begotten  Son  of  God,  and  not  merely  a  Son  by  adoption 
and  grace. 

19  — [Then  answered  Jesus  and  said  unto  them.']  This  verse  begins 
a  long  discourse,  in  which  our  Lord  formally  defends  himself 
from  the  charge  of  the  Jews  of  laying  claim  to  what  He  had  no 
right  to  claim.  (1.)  He  asserts  His  own  Divine  authority,  com- 
mission, dignity,  and  equaHty  with  God  His  Father.  (2.)  He 
brings  forward  the  evidence  of  His  Divine  commission,  which 
the  Jews  ought  to  consider  and  receive.  (3.)  Finally,  He  tells 
the  Jews  plainly  the  reason  of  their  unbelief,  and  charges  home 
on  their  consciences  their  love  of  man's  praise  more  than 
God's,  and  their  inconsistency  in  pretending  to  honour  Moses 
while  they  did  not  honour  Christ.  It  is  a  discourse  almost  un- 
rivalled in  depth  and  majesty. 

There  are  few  chapters  in  the  Bible,  perhaps,  where  we  feel 
our  own  shallowness  of  understanding  so  thoroughly,  and  dis- 


JOHN,    CHAP.   V.  283 

cover  so  completely  the  insufficiency  of  all  human  language  to 
express  ^'  the  deep  things  of  God."  Men  are  often  saying  they 
wnnt  explanations  of  the  mysteries  of  the  Christian  faith,  the 
Trinity,  the  Incarnation,  the  person  of  Christ,  and  the  like. 
Let  them  just  observe,  when  we  do  find  a  passage  full  of  expla- 
natory statements  on  a  deep  subject,  how  much  there  is  that 
we  have  no  line  to  fathom  and  no  mind  to  take  in.  "  I  want 
more  light,"  says  proud  man.  God  gives  him  his  desire  in  this 
chiipter.  and  Hfts  up  the  veil  a  little.  But  behold  1  we  are  daz- 
zled by  the  very  light  we  wanted,  and  find  we  have  not  eyes  to 
take  it  in. 

It  has  always  been  thought  by  many  commentators  that  this 
solemn  discourse  of  our  Lord's  was  delivered  before  the  Sanhe- 
drim, or  general  Ecclesiastical  Assembly  of  the  Jews.  They 
regard  it  as  a  formal  defence  of  His  Divinity  and  Messiahship, 
and  a  statement  of  evidence  why  He  should  be  received,  before 
a  regularly  constituted  ecclesiastical  court. — It  may  be  so.  Pro- 
babilities seem  in  favour  of  the  idea.  But  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  we  have  noth'ng  but  internal  evidence  in  favour  of 
the  theory.  There  is  not  a  word  said  to  show  that  our  Lord 
was  formally  brought  before  the  Sanhedrim,  and  made  a  formal 
defence. — Some  writers  lay  much  stress  upon  the  opening  words 
of  the  19th  verse, — "  Then  answered  Jesus  and  said," — and  con- 
sider that  these  words  imply  a  formal  charge  in  court,  and  a 
formal  reply  from  our  Lord.  It  may  be  true.  But  we  must 
remember  that  it  is  only  a  conjecture. 

One  thing  only  is  certain.  Nowhere  else  in  the  Gospels  do 
we  find  our  Lord  making  such  a  formal,  systematic,  orderly, 
regular  statement  of  His  own  unity  with  the  Father,  His  Divine 
commission  and  authority,  and  the  proofs  of  His  Messiahship, 
as  we  find  in  this  discourse.  To  me  it  seems  one  of  the  deepest 
things  in  the  Bible. 

[Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you.']  Here,  as  elsewhere,  the  re- 
mark applies,  that  this  form  of  expression  always  precedes  some 
statement  of  more  than  ordinary  depth  and  importance. 

[The  Son  can  do  nothing  of  himself,  &c.]  This  opening  verse 
declares  ihe  complete  unity  there  is  between  God  the  Father 
and  God  the  Son.  The  Son,  from  His  very  nature  and  relation 
to  the  Father,  "can  do  nothing"  independently  or  separately 
from  the  Father.  It  is  not  that  He  lacks  or  luants  the  power 
to  do,  but  I  hat  He  unU  not  do.  (Compare  Gen.  xix.  22.)  When 
the  angel  said,  "  I  cannot  do  anything  till  thou  be  come  thither;" 
it  means  of  course  "'I  will  not  do." — "Of  himself"  dees  not 
mean  without  help,  or  unassisted,  but  "from  himself,"  from  His 
own  independent  will.  He  can  only  do  such  things  as,  from  His 
unity  with  the  Father,  and  consequent  ineffable  knowledge,  He 


284  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

*'  seeth"  tLs  Father  doing.  For  the  Father  and  the  Son  are  so 
united, — one  God  though  two  Persons, — that  whatsoever  the 
Father  does  the  Son  does  also.  The  acts  of  the  Son  therefore 
are  not  His  own  independent  acts,  but  the  acts  of  His  Father  also. 

The  Greek  word  which  we  render  "likewise"  must  not  be 
supposed  to  mean  nothing  more  than  ''  also,  as  well."  It  is 
literally  "  in  like  manner." 

Bishop  Hall  paraphrases  this  saying  of  our  Lord  thus: — "1 
and  the  Father  are  one  indivisible  essence,  and  our  acts  are  no 
less  inseparable.  The  Son  can  do  nothing  without  the  will  and 
act  of  the  Father ;  and,  even  as  He  is  man,  can  do  nothing  but 
wliat  He  seeth  agreeable  to  the  will  and  purpose  of  His  heavenly 
Father." 

Barnes  remarks, — "  The  words  '  what  things  soever '  are  with- 
out limit ;  all  that  the  Father  does,  the  Son  likewise  does.  This 
is  as  high  an  assertion  as  possible  of  His  being  equal  with  God. 
If  one  does  all  that  another  does,  or  can  do,  then  there  is  proof 
of  equality.  If  the  Son  does  all  that  the  Father  does,  then,  like 
Him,  He  must  be  almighty,  omniscient,  all-present,  and  infinite 
in  every  perfection ;  or,  in  other  words,  He  must  be  God." 

Augustine  remarks, — "  Our  Lord  does  not  say,  whatsoever  the 
Father  doeth  the  Son  does  other  things  like  them,  but  the  very 
same  things. ...1{  the  Son  doeth  the  same  things,  and  in  Hke  man- 
ner, then  let  the  Jew  be  silenced,  the  Chri-tian  believe,  the 
heretic  be  convinced ;  the  Son  is  equal  with  the  Father." 

Hilary,  quoted  in  the  ^' Catena  Aurea"  remarks, — "  Christ  is 
the  Son  because  He  does  nothing  of  Himself  He  is  God  because 
whatsoever  things  the  Father  doeth,  He  doeth  the  same.  They 
are  One  because  They  are  equal  in  honour.  He  is  not  the  Father 
because  He  is  sent." 

Diodati  remarks, — "The  phrase,  'what  He  seeth  the  Father 
do,'  is  a  figurative  term,  showing  the  inseparable  communion  of 
will,  wisdom,  and  power,  between  the  Son  and  the  Father  in 
the  internal  order  of  the  most  holy  Trinity." 

Toletus  remarks, — "  When  it  is  said  '  the  Son  can  do  nothing 
of  Himself,'  thi-^  does  not  maan  want  of  power,  bnt  the  highest 
pcwer.  Just  as  it  is  a  mark  ot  omnipotence  not  to  be  able  to  die, 
or  to  be  worn  out,  or  to  be  annihilated,  because  there  is  nothing 
that  cm  injure  omnipotence,  so,  likewise,  'to  be  unable  to  do 
anything  oi'  Himself  is  no  mark  of  impotence,  but  of  the 
highest  power.  It  means  nothing  less  than  having  one  and  the 
same  power  with  the  Father,  so  that  nothing  can  be  done  by  tho 
One  which  is  not  equally  done  by  the  Other." 

20. — ^The  Father  loveth  the  Son,  c&c.]     This  verse  carries  on  the 


JOHN,    CHAP.   V.  285 

thought  begun  in  the  preceding  verse, — tne  unity  of  the  Father 
and  the  Son.  When  we  read  the  words,  "  The  father  loveth  " 
and  the  "Father  showeth,"  we  must  not  for  a  moment  suppose 
them  to  imply  any  superiority  in  the  Father,  or  any  inferiority 
in  the  Son,  as  to  their  Divine  nature  and  essence. — The  "  love  " 
is  not  the  love  of  an  earthly  parent  to  a  beloved  child.  The 
"sliowing"  is  not  the  showing  of  a  teacher  to  an  ignorant 
Bcbolar.  The  "  love  "  is  meant  to  show  us  that  unspeakable  unity 
of  heart  and  affection  (if  such  words  may  be  reverently  used) 
which  eternally  existed  and  exists  between  the  Father  and  the 
Son.  The  "showing"  means  that  entire  confidence  and  co- 
operation which  there  was  between  the  Father  and  the  Son  as  to 
all  the  works  which  the  Son  should  do  when  He  came  into  the 
world,  to  fill  the  ofl&ce  of  Mediator,  and  to  save  sinners. — The 
"greater  works,'' which  remained  to  be  shown,  were  evidently 
the  works  specified  in  the  two  following  verse>;, — the  works  of 
quickening  and  of  judging.  That  the  Jews  did  "marvel,"  and 
were  confounded  at  the  works  of  "quickening,"  we  know  from 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  That  they  will  "marvel"  even  more 
at  our  Lord's  work  of  judgment  we  shall  see  when  Christ  comes 
again  to  jadge  the  heathen,  to  restore  Jerusalem,  to  gather  Israel, 
to  convince  the  Jews  of  their  unbelief,  and  to  renew  the  face  of 
the  earth. 

Both  in  this,  and  the  preceding  verse,  we  must  carefully  re- 
member the  utter  inability  of  any  human  language,  or  human 
ideas,  to  express  perfectly  such  matters  as  our  Lord  is  speaking 
of.  Language  is  intended  specially  to  express  the  things  of  man. 
It  fails  greatly  when  used  to  express  things  about  God.  In  the 
expressions  "seeth  the  Father  do," — "loveth  the  Son," — "show- 
eth him  all  things," — "  will  show  him  greater  works," — we  must 
carefully  bear  this  in  mind.  We  must  remember  that  they  are 
expressions  accommodated  to  our  weaker  capacities.  They  are 
intended  to  explain  the  relation  between  two  divine  Beings, 
who  are  one  in  essence,  though  two  Persons, — cue  in  mind  and 
will,  though  two  in  manifestation, — equal  in  all  things  as  touch- 
ing the  Grodhead,  though  the  Son  is  inferior  to  the  Father  as 
touching  His  manhood.  There  must  needs  be  immense  difficulty 
in  finding  words  to  convey  any  idea  of  the  relation  between 
these  two  Ptrsons.  Hence  the  language  used  by  our  Lord  must 
be  cautiously  handled,  with  a  constant  recollection  that  we  are 
not  reading  of  an  earthly  father  and  son,  but  of  God  the  Father 
and  God  the  Son,  who  though  one  in  essence  as  God,  are  at 
the  same  time  two  distinct  Persons. 

Augustine  wisely  remarks,  "  There  are  times  when  speech  is 
deficient,  even  when  the  understanding  is  proficient.  How  much 
more  doth  speech  suffer  defect,  when  the  understanding  hath 
nothing  perfect  I " 


286  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Auofustine  and  Bernard  both  remark,  that  it  is  far  "  greater 
work"  to  repair  ruined  human  nature,  than  to  make  it  at  first, 
and  to  re-create  it,  than  to  create  it. 

21,  22. — [As  the  Father  raiseth  up  the  dead,  &c.'\  Our  Lord  here 
proceeds  to  tell  the  Jews  one  of  His  mighty  works  which  He 
had  come  to  do,  in  proof  of  His  divine  nature,  authority,  and 
commission.  Did  they  find  fault  with  Him  for  making  Himself 
equal  wiin  God  ?  Let  them  know  that  He  had  the  same  power 
as  God  tiie  Father  to  give  "life"  and  quicken  the  dead.  Let 
them  know  furthermore,  that  all  "judgment"  was  committed  to 
Him.  Surely  He  who  had  in  His  hand  the  mighty  prerogatives 
of  giving  life  and  judging  the  world,  had  a  right  to  speak  of 
himself  as  equal  with  God  1 

When  we  read  "the  Father  raiseth  up  the  dead,  and  quick- 
eneth  them,"  we  must  either  understand  the  words  to  refer 
generally  to  God's  power  to  raise  th3  dead  at  the  last  day, — 
which  the  Jew  would  allow  as  an  article  of  faith,  and  a  special 
attribute  of  divinity, — or  else  we  mu^t  understand  it  to  apply 
to  the  power  of  spiritually  quickening  men's  souls,  which  God 
had  from  the  beginning  exercised  in  calling  men  from  death  to 
life, — or  else  we  must  simply  take  it  to  mean  that  to  give  life, 
whether  bodily  or  spiritual,  is  notoriously  the  peculiar  attribute 
of  God.  The  last  view  appears  to  me  the  most  probable  one, 
and  most  in  harmony  with  what  follows  in  after  verses. 

When  we  read  "  the  Son  quickeneth  whom  he  wills,"  we  have 
a  distinct  assertion  of  the  Son's  authority  to  give  life  at  His  will, 
either  bodily  or  spiritual,  with  the  same  irresistible  power  as  the 
Father.  The  highest  of  all  gifts  He  has  but  to  "  will "  and  to 
bestow.  The  Greek  word  translated  "  quickeneth,"  is  very 
strong.  It  is,  literally,  "  makes  alive,"  and  seems  to  imply  the 
power  of  making  life  of  all  kind,  both  bodily  and  spiritual. 

Burkitt  remarks,  that  it  is  never  said  of  any  prophet  or  apostle, 
that  he  did  mighty  works  "at  his  will." 

When  we  read  "  the  Father  judgeth  no  man,  but  hath  com- 
mitted all  judgment  to  the  Son,"  we  must  understand  that  in  the 
economy  of  redemption,  the  Father  hL.s  honoured  the  Son  by 
devolving  on  Him  the  whole  office  of  judging  the  world.  It 
cannot  of  course  mean  that  judgment  is  work  with  which  the 
Father  from  His  nature  hath  nothing  to  do,  but  that  it  is  work 
which  He  has  completely  and  entirely  committed  to  the  Son's 
hands.  He  that  died  for  sinners,  is  He  that  will  judge  them. 
Thus  it  is  written, — '•  He  will  judge  the  world  in  righteousnesa 
by  that  man  whom  he  hath  ordained,"  (Acts  xvii.  31.) 

Burgon  remarks,  "  There  is  an  origiuMl,  supreme,  judicial  power; 
and  there  is  also  a  judicial  power  derived,  given  by  commission. 


287 

Christ,  p^  God,  hath  the  first  together  with  the  Father  :  Christ,  as 
man,  hath  the  second  from  the  Father," 

I  think  it  highly  probable  that  the  "  all  judgment  committed 
to  the  Son,"  includes  not  merely  the  final  judgment  of  the  last 
day,  but  the  whole  work  of  ordering,  governing,  and  deciding 
the  afi'airs  of  G-ods  kingdom.  "To  judge"  is  an  expression 
constantly  used  in  the  Old  Testament  in  the  sense  of  "  to  rule." 
The  meaning  then  would  be,  that  the  Father  has  given  to  the 
Son  the  office  of  King  and  Judge.  The  whole  administration  of 
the  Divine  government  of  the  world  is  put  into  the  hands  of  the 
Son,  Christ  Jesus.  Everything  connected  with  the  rule  of  the 
church  and  world,  as  well  as  the  last  judgment,  is  placed  in  the 
Son's  hands. 

We  should  carefully  mark  the  distinction  between  "  quicken- 
ing "  and  "judging"  in  the  language  of  these  two  verses. 

(a.)  It  is  not  said  that "  the  Father  quickeneth  no  man,"  but  hath 
committed  the  power  of  giving  life  to  the  Son.  Had  this  been 
said,  it  would  have  contradicted  the  texts  "no  man  can  come 
unto  Me  except  the  Father  draw  him,"  and  "the  Spirit  giveth 
life."  (John  vi.  44 ;  2  Cor.  iii.  6.)  Quickening  is  the  work  of  all 
three  Persons  in  the  Trinity,  of  one  as  much  as  another. 

(b).  It  is  said  that  judgment  is  the  special  work  of  the  second 
Person  of  the  Trinity.  It  is  not  the  pecuhar  office  either  of  the 
Father,  or  the  Spirit,  but  of  the  Son.  There  seems  a  fitness  in 
this.  He  who  was  condemned  by  an  unjust  judgment,  and  died 
for  sinners,  is  He  whose  office  it  will  be  to  judge  the  world. 

(c.)  It  is  said  that  "  the  Son  quickeneth  whom  he  will  "  The 
power  of  giving  life  is  as  much  the  prerogative  of  the  Son  as  of 
the  Father,  or  of  the  Spirit.  Surely  this  teaches  us  that  to  place 
the  election  of  God  the  Father,  or  the  work  of  the  Spirit,  before 
men,  as  the  first  and  principal  thing  they  should  look  at,  is  not 
good  theology.  Christ,  after  all,  is  the  meeting-point  between 
the  Trinity  and  the  world.  It  is  His  office  to  quicken  as  well  as 
pardon.  No  doubt  He  quickeneth  by  the  Spirit  whom  He  sends 
into  man's  heart.  But  it  is  His  prerogative  to  give  life  as  well 
a^  peace.  This  ought  to  be  remembered.  There  are  some  in  this 
day  who  in  a  mistaken  zeal  put  the  work  of  the  Father  and  the 
Spirit  before  the  work  of  Christ. 

23. — [That  all  men  should  honour  the  Son,  <&€.]  By  these  words 
our  Lord  teaches  us  that  the  Father  would  have  the  Son  to 
receive  equal  honour  with  Himsel£  We  are  to  understand  dis- 
tinctly that  there  is  no  inferiority  in  the  Son  to  the  Father.  He 
is  equal  to  Him  in  dignity  and  authority.  He  is  to  be  worshipped 
with  equal  worship.  If  any  man  fancies  that  to  honour  the  Son 
equally  with  the  Father,  detracts  from  the  Father's  honour,  our 


288  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Lord  declares  that  such  a  man  is  entirely  mistaken.  On  the  con- 
tary,  "  He  that  honoureth  not  the  Son,  honoureth  not  the  Father 
t'lat  se!!t  him."  It  was  the  mind  and  intenlion  of  the  Father 
that  the  Son,  as  the  Mediator  between  God  and  man,  should 
receive  honour  from  all  men.  The  glory  of  His  beloved  Son  is 
part  of  the  Father's  eternal  counsels.  Whenever  therefore  any 
one  through  ignorance  or  pride,  or  unbelief,  neglects  Christ,  but 
professes  at  the  same  time  to  honour  God,  he  is  committing  a 
mighty  error,  and  59  far  from  pleasing  God,  is  greatly  displeasing 
Him.  The  more  a  man  honours  Christ,  and  makes  much  of  Him, 
the  more  the  Father  is  pleased. 

Evangelical  Christians  should  mark  the  doctrine  of  this  verse, 
and  remember  it.  They  are  sometimes  taunted  with  holding  new 
views  in  religion,  because  they  bring  forward  Christ  so  much 
more  prominently  than  their  fathers  or  grandfathers  did.  Let 
them  see  here  that  the  more  they  exalt  the  Son  of  God  and  His 
office,  the  more  honour  they  are  doing  to  the  Father  who  sent 
Him. 

To  the  Deist  and  Socinian,  the  words  of  this  verse  are  a  strong 
condemnation.  Not  honouring  Christ,  they  are  angering  God 
the  Father.  The  Fatherhood  of  God,  out  of  Christ,  is  a  mere 
idol  of  man's  invention,  and  incapable  of  comforting  or  saving. 

Alford  remarks,  "Whosoever  does  not  honour  the  Son  with 
equal  honour  to  that  which  he  pays  to  the  Father,  however  he 
may  imagine  that  he  honours  or  approaches  God,  does  not 
honour  Him  at  all ;  because  he  can  only  be  known  by  us  as 
'the  Father  who  sent  his  Son.'" — Barnes  remarks,  "If  our 
Saviour  here  did  not  intend  to  teach  that  He  ought  to  be  wor- 
shipped and  esteemed  equal  with  God,  it  would  be  difficult  to 
teach  it  by  any  language." 

Rollock  remarks,  "  The  Jews  and  Turks  in  the  present  day 
profess  to  worship  God  earnestly,  not  only  without  the  Son,  but 
even  with  contempt  of  the  Son  Jesus  Christ.  But  the  whole  of 
such  worship  is  idolatrous,  and  that  which  they  worship  is  an 
idol.  There  is  no  knowledge  of  the  true  God  except  in  the  face 
of  the  Son." 

Wordsworth  remarks,  "  They  who  profess  zeal  for  the  one 
God  do  not  honour  Him  aright,  unless  they  honour  the  Son  as 
they  honour  the  Father.  This  is  a  warning  to  those  who  claim 
the  title  of  Unitarians,  and  deny  the  divinity  of  Christ.  No  one 
can  be  said  to  believe  in  the  Divine  Unity  who  rejects  the  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity." 

The  entire  unity  of  the  three  Persons  in  the  Trinity,  is  a 
subject  that  needs  far  more  attention  than  many  give  to  it. 
It  may  be  feared  that  many  well-meaning  Christians  are  tritheists 


JOHX,    CHAP.    V. 


289 


or  worshippers  of  three  distinct  Gods,  witliout  knowing  it.  They 
talk  as  if  God  the  Father's  mind  towards  sinners  was  one  thing-, 
and  God  the  Son's  another, — as  if  the  Father  haied  man,  and 
the  Son  loved  him  and  protected  him.  Such  persons  would  do 
well  to  study  this  part  of  Scripture,  and  to  mark  the  unity  of  the 
Father  and  the  Sou. 

After  all,  that  deep  truth,  "  the  eternal  generation  "  of  God  the 
Son,  whatever  proud  man  may  say  of  it,  is  the  foundation 
ti'uth  which  we  must  never  forget  in  trying  to  understand  a 
passage  like  that  before  us.  In  the  Trinity  "  none  is  afore  or 
after  other.  The  Father  is  eternal :  the  Son  eternal :  the  Holy 
Ghost  eternal.  The  Father  is  God :  the  Son  is  God :  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  God.  And  yet  there  are  not  three  eternals,  but  one 
eternal :  not  three  Gods,  but  one  God." — As  Burgon  remarks, 
'•'  There  never  was  a  time  when  any  one  of  the  three  Persons 
Avas  not ;"  and  it  might  be  added,  there  never  was  a  time  when 
the  three  Persons  were  not  equal.  And  yet  the  Son  was  begot- 
ten of  the  Father  from  all  eternity,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  proceed- 
ed from  all  eternity  from  the  Father  and  the  Son. 


JOHN  V.  24—29. 


27  And  hath  given  him  author- 
ity to  execute  judgment  also,  be- 
cause he  is  the  Son  of  man. 

28  Marvel  not  at  this :  for  the 
hour  is  coming,  in  the  which  all 
that  are  in  the  graves  shall  hear  his 
voice, 

29  And  shall  come  forth ;  they 
that  have  done  good,  unto  the  re- 
surrection of  life;  and  they  that 
have  done  evil,  unto  the  resurreo 
tion  of  damnation. 


24  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto 
you,  He  that  heareth  my  word,  and 
believeth  on  him  that  sent  me,  hath 
everlasting  life,  and  shall  not  come 
into  condemnation ;  but  is  passed 
from  death  unto  life. 

25  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you. 
The  hour  is  coming,  and  now  is, 
when  the  dead  shall  hear  the  voice 
of  the  Son  of  God :  and  they  that 
hear  shall  live. 

26  For  as  the  Father  hath  hfe  in 
himself;  so  hath  he  given  to  the 
Son  to  have  life  in  himself; 

The  passage  before  us  is  singularly  rich  in  weighty  truths. 
To  the  minds  of  Jews,  who  were  familiar  with  the  writ- 
ings of  Moses  and  Daniel,  it  would  come  home  with 
peculiar  power.  In  the  words  of  our  Lord  they  would 
not  fail  to  see  fresh  assertions  of  His  claim  to  be  received 
as  the  promised  Messiah. 

13 


290  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

We  see  in  these  verses  that  the  salvation  of  our  souls  db- 
fends  on  hearing  Christ.  It  is  the  man,  we  are  told, 
who  "  hears  Christ's  word,"  and  believes  that  God  the 
Father  sent  Him  to  save  sinners,  who  "  has  everlasting 
life."  Such  "  hearing "  of  course  is  something  more 
than  mere  listening.  It  is  hearing  as  a  humble  scholar, 
--hearing  as  an  obedient  disciple, — hearing  with  faith 
and  love, — hearing  with  a  heart  ready  to  do  Christ's 
will, — this  is  the  hearing  that  saves.  It  is  the  very- 
hearing  of  which  God  spoke  in  the  famous  prediction  of 
a  "  prophet  like  unto  Moses :" — "  Unto  him  shall  ye 
hearken." — "  Whosoever  will  not  hearken  unto  my  words 
which  he  shall  speak  in  my  name,  I  will  require  it  of 
him."  (Deut.  xviii.  15—19.) 

To  "  hear  "  Christ  in  this  way,  we  must  never  forget,  is 
just  as  needful  now  as  it  was  eighteen  hundred  years  ago. 
It  is  not  enough  to  hear  sermons,  and  run  after  preach- 
ers, though  some  people  seem  to  think  this  makes  up  the 
whole  of  religion.  We  must  go  much  further  than  tliis : 
we  must  "  hear  Christ."  To  submit  our  hearts  to  Christ's 
teaching, — to  sit  humbly  at  His  feet  by  faith,  and  learn  of 
Him, — to  enter  His  school  as  penitents,  and  become  His 
believing  scholars, — to  hear  His  voice  and  follow  Him, — 
this  is  the  way  to  heaven.  Till  we  know  something  ex- 
perimentally of  these  things,  there  is  no  life  in  us. 

We  see,  secondly,  in  these  verses,  how  rich  and  full  are 
the  privileges  of  the  true  hearer  and  believer.  Such  a  man 
enjoys  a  present  salvation.  Even  now,  at  this  present 
time,  he  "  hath  everlasting  life." — Such  a  man  is  com- 
pletely justified  and  forgiven.  There  remains  no  more 
condemnation  for  him.  His  sins  are  put  away.  "He 
shall  not  come  into  condemnation." — Such  a  man  is  in  an 
entirely  new  position  before  God.  He  is  like  one  who  has 
moved  from  one  side  of  a  gulf  to  another :  "  He  is  pass* 
ed  from  death  unto  life." 


291 

The  privileges  of  a  true  Christian  are  greatly  underrated 
by  many.  Chiefly  from  deplorable  ignorance  of  Scripture, 
they  have  little  idea  of  the  spiritual  treasures  of  every 
believer  in  Jesus.  These  treasures  are  brought  together 
here  in  beautiful  order,  if  we  will  only  look  at  them.  One 
of  a  true  Christian's  treasures  is  the  "  presentness  "  of  his 
salvation.  It  is  not  a  far  distant  thing  which  he  is  to  have 
at  last,  if  he  does  his  duty  and  is  good.  It  is  his  own  in 
title  the  moment  he  believes.  He  is  already  pardoned, 
forgiven,  and  saved,  though  not  in  heaven. — Another  of  a 
true  Christian's  treasures  is  the  "  completeness  "  of  his 
justification.  His  sins  are  entirely  removed,  taken  away, 
and  blotted  out  of  God's  book,  by  Christ's  blood.  He  may 
look  forward  to  judgment  without  fear,  and  say,  "who  is 
he  that  condemneth?"  (Rom.  viii.  34.)  He  shall  stand 
without  fault  befbre  the  throne  of  God. — The  last,  but  not 
the  least,  of  a  true  Christian's  treasures,  is  the  entire  change 
in  his  relation  and  position  toward  God.  He  is  no  longer 
as  one  dead  before  Him, — dead,  legally,  like  a  man  sen- 
tenced to  die,  and  dead  in  heart.  He  is  "  alive  unto  God." 
(Rom.  vi.  11.)  "He  is  a  new  creature.  Old  things  are 
passed  away,  and  all  things  are  become  new."  (2  Cor.  v. 
17.)  Well  would  it  be  for  Christians  if  these  things  were 
better  known !  It  is  want  of  knowledge,  in  many  cases, 
that  is  the  secret  of  want  of  peace. 

We  see,  thirdly,  in  these  verses,  a  striking  declaration 
of  ChrisPs  power  to  give  life  to  dead  souls.  Our  Lord 
tells  us  that  "  the  hour  is  coming  and  now  is,  when  the 
dead  shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of  God  ;  and  they  that 
hear  shall  live."  It  seems  most  unlikely  that  these  words 
were  meant  to  be  confined  to  the  rising  of  men's  bodies, 
and  were  fulfilled  by  such  miracles  as  that  of  raising 
Lazarus  from  the  grave.  It  appears  far  more  probable  that 
what  om*  Lord  had  in  view  was  the  quickening  of  souls, — 
the  resurrection  of  conversion.  (Ephes.  ii.  l ;  Colos.  ii.  13.) 


292  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

The  words  were  fulfilled  in  not  a  few  cases,  durino:  our 
Lord's  own  niinistiy.  They  were  fulfilled  far  more  com- 
pletely after  the  day  of  Pentecost,  through  the  ministry  of 
the  Apostles.  The  myriads  of  converts  at  Jerusalem,  at 
Antioch,  at  Ephesus,  at  Corinth,  and  elsewhere,  wore  all 
examples  of  their  fulfilment.  In  all  these  cases,  "  th© 
voice  of  the  Son  of  God"  awakened  dead  hearts  to 
spiritual  life,  and  made  them  feel  their  need  of  salvation, 
repent,  and  believe. — They  are  fulfilled  at  this  very  day,  in 
every  instance  of  true  conversion.  Whenever  any  men  or 
women  among  ourselves  awaken  to  a  sense  of  their  soul's 
vahie,  and  become  alive  to  God,  the  words  are  made  good 
before  our  eyes.  It  is  Christ  who  has  spoken  to  their 
hearts  by  His  Spirit.  It  is  "  the  dead  hearing  Christ's  voice, 
and  living." 

We  see,  lastly,  in  these  verses,  a  most  solemn  prophecy 
of  the  final  resurrection  of  all  the  dead.  Our  Lord  tells 
us  that  "  the  hour  is  coming  when  all  that  are  in  the  grave 
shall  hear  his  voice,  and  shall  come  forth  ;  they  that  have 
done  good  to  the  resurrection  of  life,  and  they  that  have 
done  evil  to  the  resurrection  of  damnation." 

The  passage  is  one  of  those  that  ought  to  sink  down 
very  deeply  into  our  hearts,  and  never  be  forgotten.  All 
is  not  over  when  men  die.  Whether  they  like  it  or  not, 
they  will  have  to  come  forth  from  their  graves  at  the  last 
day,  and  to  stand  at  Christ's  bar.  None  can  escape  His 
summons.  When  His  voice  calls  them  before  Him,  all 
must  obey. — When  men  rise  again,  they  will  not  all  rise  in 
the  same  condition.  There  will  be  two  classes — two 
parties — two  bodies.  Not  all  will  go  to  heaven.  Not  all 
will  be  saved.  Some  will  rise  again  to  inherit  eternal  life, 
but  some  will  rise  again  only  to  be  condemned.  These  are 
terrible  things!  But  the  words  of  Christ  arc  plain  and 
unmistakeable.     Thus  it  is  written,  and  thns  it  must  be. 

Let  us  make  sure  that  we  hear  Christ's  quickening  voice 


293 

now^  and  are  numbered  among  His  true  disciples.  Let  us 
know  the  privileges  of  true  believers,  while  we  have  life 
and  liealth.  Then,  when  His  voice  shakes  heaven  and 
earth,  and  is  calling  the  dead  from  their  gi-aves,  we  shall 
feel  confidence,  and  not  be  "  ashamed  before  Him  at  his 
coming."  (1  John  ii.  28.) 

Notes.     John  Y.  24 — 29. 

24. — [Verily,  verily,  1  say."]  Here,  as  in  other  places,  these  words 
are  the  preface  to  a  saying  of  more  than  ordinary  solemnity  and 
importance. 

[He  that  hearetli  my  word.']  The  "  hearing"  here  is  much  more 
than  mere  hstening,  or  hearing  with  the  ears.  It  means  hearing 
/  with  the  heart,  hearing  with  faith,  hearing  accompanied  by 
obedient  discipleship.  He  that  so  hears  the  doctrine,  teaching, 
or  ''  word  "  of  Christ,  hath  life.  It  is  such  hearing  as  that  of  the 
true  sheep :  "  My  sheep  hear  my  voice,"  (John  x.  27,)  or  as 
that  spoken  of  by  St,  Paul:  "Ye  have  not  so  learned  Christ,  if 
so  be  that  ye  have  heard  him,  and  have  been  taught  by  him." 
(Eph.  iv.  21.) 

[Believeth  on  Him  that  sent  Me.]  This  must  not  be  supposed  to 
mean  that  a  vague  faith  in  G-od,  such  as  the  Deist  professes  to 
have,  is  the  way  to  everlasting  life.  The  belief  spoken  of  is  a 
believing  on  God  in  Christ, — a  believing  on  God  as  the  God  who 
sent  Christ  to  save  sinners, — a  believing  on  God  as  the  God  and 
Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  has  planned  and  provided 
redemption  by  the  blood  of  His  Son.  He  who  so  believes  on 
God  the  Father,  is  the  same  man  that  beheves  in  God  the  Son. 
In  this  sense  the  Father  is  just  as  much  the-  object  of  saving  faith 
as  the  Son.  Thus  we  read,  "  It  shall  be  imputed  if  we  believe 
on  him  who  raised  up  Jesus  our  Lord  from  the  dead."  (Rom. 
iv.  24.)  And  again,  "  Who  by  him  do  believe  in  God,  that  raised 
him  up  from  the  dead,  and  gave  him  glory,  that  your  faith  and 
hope  might  be  in  God."  (1  Pet.  i.  21.)  He  that  rightly  believes 
on  Christ  as  his  Saviour,  with  the  same  faith  believes  in  God  as 
his  reconciled  Father.  The  Gospel  that  invites  the  sinner  to 
believe  in  Jesus  as  his  Redeemer  and  Advocate,  invites  him  at 
the  same  time  to  believe  in  the  Father,  who  is  "  well  pleased  " 
with  all  who  trust  in  His  Son. 

Henry  remarks,  "Christ's  design  is  to  bring  us  to  God.  (1 
Pet.  iii.  18.)  As  God  is  the  first  original  of  all  grace,  so  is  He 
the  ultimate  object  of  all  faith.  Christ  is  our  way,  and  God  ia 
our  rest.     We  must  believe  on  God  as  having  sent  Jesus  Clmist, 


294  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

and  reef  mmended  Himself  to  our  faith  and  love,  by  manifesting 
His  glory  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ." 

Lightfoot  remarks,  "■  He  doth  most  properly  centre  the  ultimate 
fixing  and  resting  of  belief  in  God  the  Father.  For  as  from  Him, 
as  from  a  fountain,  do  flow  all  those  things  that  are  the  object  of 
faith, — namely  free  grace^  the  gift  of  Christ,  the  way  of  redemp- 
tion, the  gracious  promises, — so  unto  Him  as  to  that  fountain 
doth  faith  betake  itself  in  its  final  resting  and  repose, — namely  to 
God  in  Chri^.' 

Chemnitius  i^emarks,  that  the  expression  "  believe  on  Him  who 
sent  me,"  shows  "  that  true  faith  embraces  the  word  of  the  Gos- 
pel, not  as  something  thought  out  by  Christ  alone,  but  as  some- 
thing decreed  in  the  secret  counsel  of  the  whole  Trinity." 

[Hdth  everlasting  life.']  This  means  that  he  possesses  a  com- 
plete title  to  an  everlasting  life  of  glory  hereafter,  and  is  reckoned 
pardoned,  forgiven,  justified,  and  an  heir  of  heaven,  even  now 
upon  earth.  His  soul  is  delivered  from  the  second  death. — The 
*'  presentness "  of  the  expression  should  be  carefully  noticed. 
Everlasting  life  is  the  present  possession  of  every  true  believer, 
from  the  moment  he  believes.  It  is  Hot  a  thing  he  shall  have  at 
last.  He  has  it  at  once,  even  in  this  world.  "  All  that  believe 
are  justified." — "  Being  justified  by  faith  we  have  peace  with 
God."  (Acts  xiii.  39 ;  Rom.  v.  1.) 

[ShaU  not  come  into  condemnation.]  The  Greek  word  for 
"  come  "  is  in  the  present  tense,  and  it  would  be  more  literally 
rendered  "  does  not  come."  The  meaning  is,  there  is  no  con- 
demnation for  him.  His  guilt  is  removed  even  now.  He  has 
nothing  to  fear  in  looking  forward  to  the  judgment  of  the  last 
day.  "  There  is  therefore  now  no  condemnation  to  them  which 
are  in  Christ  Jesus." — "He  that  believeth  on  Him  is  not  con- 
demned."  (Rom.  viii.  1 ;  John  iii.  18.) 

I  cannot  see  in  these  words  any  warrant  for  the  notion  held 
by  some,  that  the  saints  of  God  shall  not  be  judged  at  the  last 
day  in  any  way  at  aU.  The  notion  itself  is  so  utterly  contra- 
dictory to  some  plain  texts  of  Scripture  (2  Cor.  v.  10 ;  Rom.  xiv. 
10;  Matt.  XXV.  31),  that  I  cannct  understand  any  one  holding 
it.  But  even  in  the  text  before  u-,  it  seeos  to  me  a  violent 
straining  of  the  words  to  apply  them  to  the  judgment-day.  The 
thing  our  Lord  is  speaking  of  is  the  present  privilege  of  a 
believer.  The  tense  He  uses,  as  Chemnitius  bids  us  specially 
observe,  is  the  present  and  not  the  future.  And  even  supposing 
that  the  words  do  apply  to  the  judgment-day,  the  utmost  that 
can  be  fairly  made  of  them  is,  that  a  believer  has  no  condem- 
iLation  to  fiar  at  the  last  da}^  Judged  according  to  his  works 
he  shall  be.     Condemned  he  may  certainly  feel  assured  he  shall 


295 

not  be.  From  the  day  he  beUeves,  all  his  condemnation  is  taken 
away. 

Ecolampadius  remarks  how  irreconcileable  this  verse  is  with 
the  Romish  doctrine  of  purgatory. 

[But  is  passed  from  death  to  Ufe.]  This  means  that  a  believer 
has  passed  from  a  state  of  spiritual  death  to  a  state  of  spiritual 
life.  Before  he  believed,  he  was  dead  legally, — dead  as  a  guilty 
criminal  condemned  to  die.  In  the  day  that  he  beheved  he 
received  a  free  and  full  pardon.  His  sentence  was  reversed  and 
put  away.  Instead  of  being  legally  dead,  be  became  legally 
alive. — But  this  is  not  all.  His  heart,  which  was  dead  in  sins, 
is  now  renewed,  and  alive  unto  Grod.  There  is  a  change  in  his 
character  as  well  as  in  his  position  toward  Grod.  Like  the 
prodigal  son,  he  "  was  dead  and  is  alive."  (Luke  xv.  24.) 

We  should  mark  carefully  the  strong  language  of  Scrip- 
ture in  describing  the  immense  difference  between  the  posi- 
tion of  a  man  who  believes,  and  the  man  who  does  not  believe. 
It  is  nothing  else  than  the  difference  between  hfe  and  death, — 
between  being  dead  and  being  alive.  Whatever  some  may  think 
fit  to  say  about  the  privileges  of  baptism,  we  must  never  shrink 
from  maintaining,  that  so  long  as  men  do  not  hear  Christ's  voice 
and  believe, — so  long  they  are  dead,  whether  baptized  or  not, 
and  have  no  life  in  them.  Faith,  not  baptism,  is  the  turning- 
point.  He  that  has  not  yet  believed  is  dead,  and  must  be  born 
again.  When  he  believes,  and  not  till  then,  he  will  pass  from 
death  to  life. 

Ferus  remarks,  "  Although  it  seems  very  easy  to  believe,  and 
many  think  they  do  believe  when  they  have  only  heard  the 
name  of  believing, — supposing  that  to  believe  is  the  same  as  to 
understand,  to  remember,  to  know,  to  think, — yet  this  beheving 
is  in  truth  a  hard  and  difficult  thing.  It  is  easy  to  fast,  to  say 
prayers,  to  go  on  pilgrimage,  to  give  alms  and  the  like ;  but  to 
believe  is  a  thing  impossible  to  our  strength.  Let  superstitious 
people  learn  that  God  requires  of  us  a  far  higher  and  more 
difi&cult  kind  of  worship  than  they  imagine.  Let  pious  people 
learn  to  seek  faith  more  than  anything,  saying, — Lord,  increase 
our  faith." 

25. — [Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you]     This  emphatic  -  preface  here 

begins  a  prophecy  of  the  wonderful  things  that  should  yet  be 
done  by  the  Son  of  G-od.  Did  the  Jews  of  Jerusalem  desire  to 
know  what  proofs  of  Divine  power  and  authority  the  Son  of  God 
would  give  ?     Let  them  hear  what  he  would  do. 

[The  hour  is  coming  and  now  is.]  This  meant  that  a  time  was 
coming,  and  in  fact  had  already  begun. 

iThe  dtad  shall  hear  His  voice  and  live.]    It  is  thought  by  some 


296  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

that  these  words  apply  to  the  hteral  raising  again  of  dead  persons, 
such  as  Lazarus  at  Bethany.  I  cannot  think  it  I  beheve  that 
the  "  dead  "  liere  spoken  of  are  the  spiritually  dead.  I  believe 
that  the  "  hearing  the  voice  of  the  Son  of  God,"  means  the 
hearing  of  faith.  I  believe  that  the  "living"  spoken  of  means 
the  rising  out  of  the  death  of  sin  to  spiritual  newness  of  life. 
And  I  believe  that  the  whole  verse  is  a  prediction  of  the  many 
conversions  of  dead  sinners  that  were  to  take  place  soon,  and  had 
begun  in  some  measure  to  take  place  already.  The  prediction 
was  fulfilled  when  dead  souls  were  converted  during  our  Lord's 
own  ministry,  and  was  much  more  fulfilled  after  the  day  of  Pen- 
tecost, when  He  was  preached  by  His  apostles  to  the  Gentiles, 
and  "believed  on  in  the  world."  (1  Tim.  iii.  16.) 

To  confine  the  words  to  th@  few  cases  of  miraculous  raising 
of  dead  bodies  which  took  place  in  the  time  of  our  Lord  and  His 
apostles,  appears  to  supply  a  very  inadequate  interpretation,  and 
to  be  rendered  unnecessary  by  the  succeeding  verse. 

Let  it  be  noted  that  it  is  only  those  who  "  hear,"  or  "  have 
heard  "  with  faith  the  voice  of  Christ,  that  live.  Spiritual  life 
turns  on  believing.  "Ye  also  trusted,  after  that  ye  heard  the 
word  of  truth."  (Eph.  i.  13.) 

Ferus  and  Cocceius  think  that  the  calling  and  conversion  of 
the  Gentiles  was  the  principal  thought  in  our  Lord's  mind  when 
He  spoke  these  words. 

26. — [For  as  the  Father^  etc  ]  The  first  part  of  this  verse  needs  no 
explanation.  It  is  an  admitted  principle  that  God  is  the  Author 
and  Source  of  all  life.  He  "  hath  life  in  himself."  When  it 
says  further  that  "  he  hath  given  to  the  Son  to  have  life  in  him- 
self," we  must  not  suppose  it  means  that  He  has  bestowed  it  on 
His  Son,  in  the  same  way  that  He  gives  gifts  to  mere  men,  such 
as  prophets  and  apostles.  It  rather  means  that  in  His  everlasting 
counsels  concerning  man  s  redemption.  He  has  appointed  that 
the  Second  Person  of  the  Trinity, — His  beloved  Son, — 
should  be  the  Dispenser  and  Giver  of  life  to  all  mankind. 
"  God  has  given  to  us  eternal  fife,  and  this  life  is  in  his  Son."  (1 
John  V.  11.) 

Both  here  and  in  the  following  verse  we  must  remember  that 
"giving"  does  not  imply  any  inferiority  in  the  Son  to  the  Father, 
so  far  as  concerns  His  Divine  essence.  The  things  "  given"  to 
the  Son  were  things  solemnly  appointed,  deputed,  and  laid  upon 
Him  when  He  assumed  the  office  of  Mediator,  in  virtue  of  His 
office. 

Burgon  remarks, — "  Both  the  Father  and  the  Son  have  the 
same  life;  both  have  it  in  themselves;  both  in  the  same 
degree ;  as  the  on<»  so  the  other ;  but  only  with  this  difference, 


297 

— the  Father  from  all  eternity  giveth  it,  the  Son  from  all  eternity 
receiveth  it." 

27. — [And  hath  given  him  authority ^  etc.]  This  means  that  in  virtue 
of  His  Mediatorial  ofi&ce  the  Second  Person  of  the  Trinity  ia 
specially  appointed  to  be  the  Judge  of  all  mankind.  In  the 
couiLsels  of  God  concerning  man,  "judgment"  is  assigned  to  the 
Son,  and  not  to  the  Father,  or  to  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  is  undoubt- 
edly true  that  God  is  "  the  Judge  of  all."  (Heb.  xii.  23.)  But 
it  is  also  true  that  it  is  God  the  Son  who  will  execute  judgment^ 
and  sit  on  the  throne  at  the  last  day. 

[Because  he  is  the  Son  of  man.]  These  words  seem  to  imply 
that  there  is  a  connection  between  our  Lord's  incarnation  and 
His  filling  the  oflQce  of  the  Judge.  It  is  because  He  humbled 
Himself  to  take  our  nature  on  Him,  and  be  born  of  the  Virgin 
Mary,  that  he  will  at  length  be  exalted  to  execute  judgment  at 
the  last  day.  It  appears  to  be  the  same  thought  that  St.  Paul 
expresses  when  he  tells  the  Philippians  that  because  of  Christ's 
humiliation,  "  God  also  hath  highly  exalted  him,  and  given  him 
a  name  which  is  above  every  name,"  etc.  (Phil.  ii.  9.) 

Burgon  remarks, — "  Because  of  His  alliance  with  man's  natrire, 
because  of  His  sense  of  man's  infirmities,  because  of  all  He  did 
and  suffered  for  man's  sake  as  the  Son  of  man,  the  Son  is  that 
Person  of  the  Trinity  who  is  most  fit,  as  well  as  most  worthy,  to 
be  man's  judge." 

The  expression,  "  The  Son  of  man,"  would  be  rendered  more 
literally,  "  a  Son  of  man,"  or,  "  Son  of  man,"  Campbell  remarks 
that  the  absance  of  the  article  "  the"  before  the  words  "  Son  of 
man,"  occurs  novyhere  in  the  Gospels  except  in  this  passage. 

Both  in  this  and  the  preceding  verse  we  should  observe  an 
example  of  the  great  truth,  that  "  order  is  heaven's  first  law." 
Even  the  Second  Person  in  the  Trinity,  one  with  the  Father, 
very  and  eternal  Gol,  does  not  take  on  Himself  the  office  of 
giving  life  and  executing  judgment,  but  receives  it  through  the 
solemn  appointment  of  God  the  Father.  Just  as  it  is  written, — 
"  Christ  glorified  not  himself  to  be  made  an  high  priest,  but  he 
that  said  unto  him,  Thou  art  my  .Son  "  (Heb.  v.  5),  so  we  find  it 
written  here,  that  in  taking  on  Him  the  office  of  Mediator,  it 
was  ^^ given ^  to  Him  to  have  life  in  Himself,  and  "authority 
given  to  him"  to  judge.  Those  who  take  on  th«.<Qselves  offices 
Avithout  either  divine  or  human  commission  are  very  unlike  our 
Lord. 

Toletus    quotes   a   remarkable   passage   from    Athanasius,    in 

which  he  points  o  it  that  such  expressions  as,   '^  given  to  the  Son 

by  the  Father,"    '  received  by  the   Son  fi-om  the   Father,"    are 

purposely  used  in  order  to  prevent  the  Sabellian  heresy  of  sup- 

13* 


298  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

posing  that  the  Father  and  the  Son  are  one  and  the  same  Person. 
— Such  expressions  are  an  unanswerable  proof  that  the  Fathef 
and  the  Son  are  two  distinct  Persons,  though  one  God.  We 
must  never  forget  the  words  of  the  Athanasian  creed,— 
"  Neiuier  confounding  the  Persons  nor  dividing  the  substance." 

28,  29. — [Afarvel  not  at  this.]  These  words  imply  that  the  hearers 
of  our  Lord  were  astonished  at  the  things  He  had  spoken  con- 
cerning His  Divine  commission  to  give  life  and  to  judge.  He 
proceeds  to  tell  them  that  they  have  not  yet  heard  all.  If  they 
wondered  at  what  they  had  already  heard,  what  would  they 
think  when  He  told  them  one  thing  more  ? 

[The  hour  is  coming.]  This  means  the  last  day.  To  use  the 
present  tense  of  a  time  so  distant  as  this  is  characteristic  of  one 
who  is  very  God,  to  whom  time  past,  time  present,  and  time  to 
come,  are  all  alike,  and  a  thousand  years  are  as  one  day. 

[All  that  are  in  the  graves  shall  hear  his  voice..,come  forth... dam- 
nation, etc.]  These  words  are  singularly  like  those  in  Daniel  xii. 
2.  They  contain  one  of  the  most  distinct  statements  in  Scrip- 
ture of  that  great  truth, — the  resurrection  of  the  dead. — It  shall 
be  universal,  and  not  confined  to  a  few  only.  "AH "in  the 
graves  shall  come  forth,  whether  old  or  young,  rich  or  poor. — It 
shall  take  place  at  Christ's  command  and  bidding.  His  "  voice" 
shall  be  the  call  that  shall  summon  the  dead  from  their  graves.-^ 
There  shall  be  a  distinction  of  those  who  rise  again,  into  two 
classes.  Some  shall  rise  to  glory  and  happiness, — to  what  is 
called  a  "  resurrection  of  life,"  Some  shall  rise  to  be  lost  and 
ruined  for  ever, — to  what  is  called  a  "  resurrection  of  damnation." 
— The  doings  of  men  shall  be  the  test  by  which  their  final  state 
shall  be  decided.  "  Life"  shall  be  the  portion  of  those  tliat  have 
"  done  good,"  "  damnation"  of  those  that  "  have  done  evil,"  in 
the  resurrection-day. 

(a.)  This  passage  condemns  those  who  fancy  that  this  world  is 
all,  and  that  this  life  ends  everything,  and  that  the  grave  is  the 
conclusion.  They  are  awfully  mistaken.  There  is  a  resurrection 
and  a  life  to  come. 

(6.)  This  passage  condemns  those  who  try  to  persuade  us  in 
the  present  day  that  there  is  no  future  punishment,  no  hell,  no 
condemnation  for  the  wicked  in  the  world  to  come, — that  the 
love  of  God  is  lower  than  hell, — that  God  is  too  merciful  and 
compassionate  to  punish  any  one.  There  is  a  "  resurrection," 
we  are  told,  "of  damnation." 

(c.)  This  passage  condemns  those  who  try  to  make  out  that 
resurrection  is  the  peculiar  privilege  of  believers  and  saints,  and 
that  the  wicked  will  be  punished  by  complete  annihilation.  Both 
heie  and  in  Acts  xxiv.  15  we  are  distinctly  told  that  both  bad 


299 

and  good  shall  rise  again.  In  St.  Paul's  famous  chapter  about 
the  resurrection  (1  Cor.  xt.),  the  resurrectioii  of  behevers  only 
is  treated  of. 

(d.)  This  passage  condemns  those  who  try  to  make  out  that 
men's  lives  and  conduct  are  of  little  importance  so  long  as  they 
profess  to  have  faith  and  to  believe  in  Christ.  Christ  himself 
tells  us  expressly  that  the  ''  doings  "  of  men,  whether  good  or 
evil,  will  be  the  evidence  that  shall  decide  whether  they  rise 
again  to  glory  or  condemnation. 

Musculus  remarks  that  the  goodness  which  God  requires  of  us 
is  not  such  as  only  begins  in  the  next  world,  after  the  resurrec- 
tion. We  must  have  it  now,  and  it  must  precede  the  time  of 
iudgment.  It  is  not  said,  ''  some  shall  rise  again  that  they  may 
be  made  good  and  partakers  of  life,"  but,  "  they  that  have  done 
good  shall  come  forth  to  a  resurrection  of  life."  We  should  take 
care  to  be  such  in  this  hfe  as  we  desire  to  be  found  in  the  day 
of  judgment. — He  also  remarks  that  our  Lord  does  not  say, 
*'  those  who  have  known  or  talked  what  is  good,"  but,  "  those 
who  have  actually  done  good  "  shall  come  forth  to  a  resurrection 
of  life.  Those  only  will  be  found  to  have  "  done  good  "  who  are 
Grod's  elect,  born  again,  and  true  believers.  Nothing  but  true 
faith  will  bear  the  fruit  of  good  works. 

Calvin  remarks  that  our  Lord  is  not  here  speaking  of  the 
cause  of  salvation,  but  of  the  marks  of  the  saved,  and  that  one 
great  mark  which  distinguishes  the  elect  from  the  reprobate,  is 
good  doing. 

There  are  two  different  Greek  words  used  to  express  the  Eng- 
lish words  "  they  that  have  done,"  and  it  is  difficult  to  say 
why.  Precisely  the  same  difference  exists  in  John  iii.  20,  21. 
The  attempts  made  to  explain  the  distinction  between  the  two 
words  do  not  appear  to  me  very  successful.  For  instance, — 
Wordsworth  remarks :  "  Good  made  and  done  has  permanence 
for  ever.  Evil  is  practised,  but  produces  no  fruit  for  eternity." 
Yet  I  doubt  whether  this  remark  will  apply  to  Rom.  i.  32,  aud 
ii.  3,  where  both  the  two  Greek  words  for  "  doing  "  are  used 
together,  and  applied  to  the  same  clasa  of  persons,  viz.,  the 
wicked. 

It  is  thought  by  some  that  this  passage  supports  the  doctrine 
of  the  first  resurrection  as  the  peculiar  privilege  of  the  saints. 
(Rev.  XX.  5.)  But  it  must  in  fairness  be  remembered  that  there 
is  nothing  said  here  about  distinction  of  time  in  the  resurrection 
of  the  good  and  bad. 

As  to  the  manner  in  which  Christ's  "  voice  "  will  be  heard  by 
the  dead  ^'  in  the  graves  "  we  are  told  nothing.  It  is  remark- 
able that  there  are  two  other  places  beside  this  in  which  a 


300 


EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 


"voice"  or  sound  is  mentioned  as  accompanying  the  resurrec- 
tion. In  Corinthians  we  read  of  the  "  last  trumpet."  (L  Cor.  xv. 
52.)  In  Thessalonians  we  are  told  of  "  a  shout,"  of  the  '"  voice 
of  the  archangel,"  and  the  "  trump  of  God."  (I  Thess.  iv.  16.) 
Nothing,  however,  but  conjecture  can  be  brought  forward  about 
the  subject.  No  doubt  the  latent  thought  is  that  the  dead  bodies 
of  men  are  sleeping,  and  need  to  be  awakened,  as  sleepers  are 
roused  by  a  voice. 

As  to  the  nature  of  risen  bodies  we  are  told  nothing.  Enough 
for  us  to  know  that  this  passage  clearly  shows  it  will  he  a  resur- 
rection of  "bodies"  as  well  as  souls.  It  is  those  who  are  "in 
the  graves  "  that  shall  come  forth. 


JOHN  Y.  30—39. 


30  I  can  of  mine  own  self  do 
notliing :  as  T  hear,  I  judge :  and 
my  judgment  is  just ;  because  I  seek 
not  mine  own  will,  but  the  wOl  of 
the  Father  which  hath  sent  me. 

31  If  I  bear  witness  of  myself, 
my  witness  is  not  true. 

32  There  is  another  that  beareth 
witness  of  me;  and  I  know  that 
the  witness  which  he  witnesseth  of 
me  is  true. 

33  Ye  sent  unto  John,  and  he 
bare  witness  unto  the  truth. 

34  But  I  receive  not  testimony 
from  man ;  but  these  tilings  I  say, 
that  ye  might  be  saved. 

35  He  was  a  burning  and  a  shin- 
ing light :  and  ye  were  willing  for 
0  season  to  rejoice  in  his  hght. 

In  these  verses  we  see  the  proof  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
being  the  promised  Messiah,  set  forth  before  the  Jews  in 
one  view.  Four  different  witnesses  are  brought  forward. 
Four  kinds  of  evidence  are  offered.  His  Father  in  heaven, 
— His  forerunner,  John  the  Baptist, — the  miraculous  works 
He  had  done, — the  Scriptures,  which  the  Jews  professed 
to  honour, — each  and  all  are  named  by  our  Lord,  as  testify- 
ing that  He  was  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God.     Hard  musi 


36  But  I  have  greater  witness 
than  that  of  John:  for  the  works 
which  the  Father  hath  given  me  to 
finish,  the  same  works  that  I  do, 
bear  witness  of  me,  that  the  Father 
hath  sent  me. 

37  And  the  Father  himself, 
wliich  hath  sent  me,  hath  borne 
witness  of  me.  Ye  have  neither 
heard  his  voice  at  any  time,  nor 
seen  his  shape. 

38  And  ye  have  not  his  word 
abiding  in  you :  for  whom  he  hath 
sent,  him  ye  believe  not. 

39  Search  the  Scriptures  ;  for  in 
them  ye  think  ye  have  eternal  Hfe : 
and  they  are  they  which  testify  of 
me. 


JOHN,    CHAP.    V.  301 

those  hearts  have  been  which  could  hear  such  testimony^ 
and  yet  remain  unmoved !  Bat  it  only  proves  the  truth 
of  the  old  saying, — that  unbelief  does  not  arise  so  much 
from  want  of  evidence,  as  from  want  of  will  to  believe. 

Let  us  observe  for  one  thing  in  this  passage,  the  lionout 
Christ  puts  on  His  faithful  servants.  See  how  He  speaks 
of  John  the  Baptist. — *'  He  bare  witness  of  the  truth  ;" — 
"  He  was  a  burning  and  a  shining  light." — John  had  pro- 
bably passed  away  from  his  earthly  labours  when  these 
words  w^ere  spoken.  He  had  been  persecuted,  imprisoned, 
and  put  to  death  by  Herod, — none  interfering,  none  trying 
to  prevent  his  murder.  But  this  murdered  disciple  was 
not  forgotten  by  his  Divine  Master.  If  no  one  else  remem- 
bered him,  Jesus  did.  He  had  honoured  Christ,  and  Christ 
honoured  him. 

These  things  ought  not  to  be  overlooked.  They  are 
'vritten  to  teach  us  that  Christ  cares  for  all  His  believing 
people,  and  never  forgets  them.  Forgotten  and  despised 
by  the  world,  perhaps,  they  are  never  forgotten  by  their 
Saviour.  He  knows  where  they  dwell,  and  what  their 
trials  are.  A  book  of  remembrance  is  written  for  them. 
"  Their  tears  are  all  in  His  bottle."  (Psalm  Ivi.  8.)  Their 
names  are  graven  on  the  palms  of  His  hands.  He  notices 
all  they  do  for  Him  in  this  evil  world,  though  they  think  it 
not  worth  notice,  and  He  will  confess  it  one  day  publicly, 
before  His  Father  and  the  holy  angels.  He  that  bore 
witness  to  John  the  Baptist  never  changes.  Let  believers 
remember  this.  In  their  worst  estate  they  may  boldly  say 
with  David, — "  I  am  poor  and  needy ;  yet  the  Lord 
thinketh  upon  me."  (Psalm  xl.  17.) 

Let  us  observe,  for  another  thing,  the  honour  Christ 
puts  upon  miracles^  as  an  evideiice  of  Sis  being  the 
Messiah.  He  says, — "  The  works  which  the  Father  hath 
given  me  to  finish,  the  same  works  that  I  do,  bear  witness 
of  me  that  the  Father  hath  sent  me." 


302  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

The  miracles  of  the  Lord  receive  far  less  attention,  in 
the  present  day,  as  proofs  of  His  Divine  mission,  than  they 
ought  to  do.  Too  many  regard  them  with  a  silent  incre- 
dulity, as  things  which,  not  having  seen,  they  cannot  be 
expected  to  care  for.  Not  a  few  openly  avow  that  they 
do  not  believe  in  the  possibility  of  such  things  as  miracles, 
and  would  fain  strike  them  out  of  the  Bible  as  weak  stories, 
which,  like  burdensome  lumber,  should  be  cast  overboard, 
to  lighten  the  ship. 

But,  after  all,  there  is  no  getting  over  the  fact,  that  in 
the  days  when  our  Lord  was  upon  earth.  His  miracles 
produced  an  immense  effect  on  the  minds  of  men.  They 
aroused  attention  to  Him  that  worked  them.  They  ex- 
cited inquiry,  if  they  did  not  convert.  They  were  so 
many,  so  public,  and  so  incapable  of  being  explained 
away,  that  our  Lord's  enemies  could  only  say  that  they 
were  done  by  satanic  agency.  That  they  were  done  they 
could  not  deny.  "  This  man,"  they  said,  "  doeth  many 
miracles."  (John  xi.  47.)  The  facts  which  wise  men 
pretend  to  deny  now,  no  one  pretended  to  deny  eighteen 
hundred  years  ago. 

Let  the  enemies  of  the  Bible  take  our  Lord's  last  and 
greatest  miracle — His  own  resurrection  from  the  dead — 
and  disprove  it  if  they  can.  When  they  have  done  that, 
it  will  be  time  to  consider  what  they  say  about  miracles 
in  general.  They  have  never  answered  the  evidence  of 
it  yet,  and  they  never  will.  Let  the  friends  of  the  Bible 
not  be  moved  by  objections  against  miracles,  until  that 
one  miracle  has  been  fairly  disposed  of.  If  that  is 
proved  unassailable,  they  need  not  care  much  for  quib- 
bling arguments  against  other  miracles.  If  Christ  did 
really  rise  from  the  dead  by  His  own  power,  there  is  none 
of  His  mighty  works  which  man  need  hesitate  to  believe. 

Let  us  observe,  lastly,  in  these  verses,  the  honour  that 
Christ  piits  upon  the  /Scriptures.      He  refers  to  them  in 


803 

concluding  His  list  of  evidences,  as  the  great  witnesses  to 
Hira.  "  Search  the  Scriptures,"  He  says :  "  they  are  they 
which  testify  of  me." 

The  "  Scriptures"  of  which  our  Lord  speaks  are  of  course 
the  Old  Testament.  And  His  words  show  the  important 
truth  which  too  many  are  apt  to  overlook, — that  every 
part  of  our  Bibles  is  meant  to  teach  us  about  Christ. 
Christ  is  not  merely  in  the  Gospels  and  Epistles.  Christ  is 
to  be  found  directly  and  indirectly  in  the  Law,  the  Psalms, 
and  the  Prophets.  In  the  promises  to  Adam,  Abraham, 
Moses,  and  David, — in  the  types  and  emblems  of  the  cere- 
monial law, — in  the  predictions  of  Isaiah  and  the  other 
prophets, — Jesus,  the  Messiah,  is  everywhere  to  be  found 
in  the  Old  Testament. 

How  is  it  that  men  see  these  things  so  little  ?  The 
answer  is  plain.  They  do  not  "  search  the  Scriptures." 
They  do  not  dig  into  that  wondrous  mine  of  wisdom  and 
knowledge,  and  seek  to  become  acquainted  with  its  con- 
tents. Simple,  regular  reading  of  our  Bibles  is  the  grand 
secret  of  establishment  in  the  faith.  Ignorance  of  the 
Scriptures  is  the  root  of  all  error. 

And  now  what  will  men  believe,  if  they  do  not  believe 
the  Divine  mission  of  Christ?  Great  indeed  is  the 
obstinacy  of  infidelity.  A  cloud  of  witnesses  testify  that 
Jesus  was  the  Son  of  God.  To  talk  of  wanting  evidence 
is  childish  folly.  The  plain  truth  is,  that  the  chief  seat  of 
unbelief  is  the  heart.  Many  do  not  wish  to  believe,  and 
therefore  remain  unbelievers. 

Notes.     John  Y.  30—39. 

30. — [/  can  of  rkine  own  self  etc.]  This  verse  is  perhaps  one  of 
the  most  difficult  in  Scripture.  I*  is  so  because  the  subject  of 
it  is  that  great  mystery, — the  unity  of  God  the  Father  and  God 
the  Son.  Man  has  no  language  to  express  adequately  the  idea 
that  has  to  be  conveyed.  The  general  thought  of  the  verse  seems 
to  be  aa  follows  : — 


304  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

"  In  consequence  of  the  close  relation  between  Me  and  the 
Father,  I  cannot  do  anything  independently  and  separately  from 
Him.  'I  judge,'  and  decide,  and  speak  on  all  points,  in  entire 
harmony  with  the  Father,  as  though  I  heard  Him  continually  at 
My  side ;  and  so  judging  and  speaking  My  judgment  on  all 
points  is  always  right.  It  is  right  now,  and  will  be  seen  right 
at  the  great  account  of  the  last  day.  For  in  all  that  I  do  I  seek 
not  to  do  My  Own  will  only,  but  the  will  of  Him  that  sent  Me, 
since  there  is  an  entire  harmony  between  My  will  and  His." 

Let  it  be  carefully  noted  that  at  this  part  of  His  address  our 
Lord  ceases  to  speak  in  the  third  person  of  Himself  as  "  the 
Son  of  man,"  and  begins  to  use  the  first  person, — "I  can,"  "I 
hear,"  "  I  judge,"  etc. 

"  Of  mine  own  self"  does  not  mean  "unhelped  and  unas- 
sisted," but  "from  myself," — ^from  My  own  independent  volition 
and  action. 

Chrysostom  remarks, — "  Just  as  when  we  say,  it  is  impossible 
for  God  to  do  wrong,  we  do  not  impute  to  Him  any  weakness, 
but  confess  in  Him  an  unutterable  power;  so  also  when  Christ 
saith,  '  I  can  of  my  own  self  do  nothing,'  the  meaning  is  that  it 
is  impossible, — my  nature  admits  not, — that  I  should  do  any- 
thing contrary  to  the  Father." 

"  As  I  hear"  is  an  expression  adapted  to  man's  comprehen- 
sion, to  convey  the  idea  of  the  unity  between  the  Father  and 
the  Son.  It  is  like  verse  19th,  where  it  is  said,  "  The  Son  can  do 
nothing  of  himself,  but  what  he  seeth  the  Father  do."  It  is  also 
like  the  words  used  of  the  Holy  Grhost, — "  He  shall  not  speak  of 
himself,  but  whatsoever  he  shall  Aear,  that  shall  he  speak." 
(John  xvi.  13.) 

Chrysostom  remarks, — "  Just  as  when  Christ  said,  '  we  speak 
that  we  do  know,  and  testify  that  we  have  seen,'  and  John  the 
Baptist  said,  *  that  which  he  hath  seen  and  heard  he  testifieth,' 
(John  iii,  11,  32,)  both  expressions  are  used  concerning  exact 
knowledge,  and  not  concerning  mere  'seeing'  and  'hearing;' — so 
in  this  place,  when  Christ  speaks  of  'hearing,'  He  declares  no- 
thing else  than  that  it  is  impossible  for  Him  to  desire  anything 
save  what  the  Father  desireth." 

*' I  judge"  applies  not  only  to  all  Christ's  judgments  and  de- 
cisions as  Mediator  when  He  was  upon  earth,  but  to  His  final 
judgment  at  the  last  day. 

'■  My  judgment  is  just"  would  probably  remind  the  Jews  of 
the  prophecies  about  Messiah.  (Isa.  xi.  3  and  Dan.  vii.  13.) 

"  I  seek  not  mine  own  will"  must  be  inteipreted  with  special 
reference  to  our  Lord's  Divine  nature,  as  Son  of  God.     Having 


JOHX,    CHAP.    Y.  305 

as  Q-od,  one  will  with  the  Father,  it  was  not  possible  for  Him  to 
seek  His  own  will  independently  of  the  Father.  Hence  the  judg- 
ment was  not  His  only,  but  His  Father's  also. — As  Son  of  man 
He  had  a  human  will  disiinct  from  His  Divine  will,  aa  when 
He  said,  "  Let  this  cup  pass  from  me :  neveriheiess  not  as  I 
will,  but  as  thou  wilt."  (Matt.  xxvi.  39.)  But  the  will  here 
seems  to  be  His  Divine  wilh 

Chrysostom  remarks, — ''  What  Christ  implieth  is  of  this  kind : 
— not  that  the  will  of  the  Father  is  one  and  His  own  another, 
but  that  as  one  will  in  one  mind,  so  is  Mine  own  will  and  My 
Father's." 

Once  more  we  must  remember  the  extreme  difficulty  of  han- 
dling such  a  subject  as  the  one  before  us.  The  distinction  between 
the  Persons  in  the  Trinity,  and  the  Unity  of  their  essence  at 
the  same  time,  must  always  be  a  deep  thing  to  man,  hard  to  con- 
ceive, and  harder  still  to  speak  or  write  about. 

31. — [7/"  /  hear  witness  of  myself  etc.]  This  verse  must  be  in- 
terpreted with  caution  and  reasonable  qualification.  It  would 
be  folly  and  blasphemy  to  say  that  our  Lord's  testimony  about 
Himself  must  be  false.  What  the  verse  does  appear  to  mean 
is  this : — "  If  I  have  no  other  testimony  to  bring  forward  in  proof 
of  My  Messiahship  but  My  own  word,  my  testimony  would  be 
justly  open  to  suspicion." — Our  Lord  knew  that  in  any  disputed 
question  a  man's  assertions  in  his  own  favour  are  worth  little 
or  nothing.  He  tells  the  Jews  that  He  did  not  want  them  to  be- 
heve  Him  merely  because  He  said  He  was  the  Son  of  Grod.  He 
would  show  them  that  He  had  other  witnesses,  aud  these  wit- 
nesses He  next  proceeds  to  bring  forward.  A  comparison  of 
this  verse  with  John  viii.  14  shows  at  once  that  the  meaning 
of  the  words,  "  My  witness  is  not  true,"  must  be  qualified  and 
restrained,  or  else  one  place  of  Scripture  would  contradict  the 
other. 

32. — [Tliere  is  another  that  heareth  witness.]  There  are  two  dis- 
tinct and  diJBferent  views  of  this  expression. 

(a.)  Some,  as  Chrysostom,  Theophylact,  Euthjmius,  Light- 
foot,  Brentius,  Grrotius,  Ferus,  Barradius,  Quesnel,  Whitby, 
Doddridge,  Grill,  think  that  the  "other  witness"  is  John  the 
Baptist. 

(&.)  Some,  as  Cyril,  Athanasius,  Calvin,  Beza,  Gualter,  Bacer, 
Ecolampadius,  Zwingle,  Rnpertus,  Flacius,  Calovius,  Cocceius, 
Piscator,  Musculus,  Aretius,  Toletus,  Nifanius,  Bollock,  Poole, 
Leigh,  Diodati,  Hammond,  Trapp,  Hutcheson,  Henry,  Buikitt, 
Baxter,  Bloomfield,  Lampe,  Bengel,  Pearce,  A.  Clarke,  Scott. 
Barnes,  St'er,  Alford,  Webster,  think  that  *'  the  other  witness,'* 
is  God  the  Father. 


806  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

I  feel  no  doubt  in  my  own  mind  that  this  last  is  the  coi- 
rect  view.  The  use  of  the  present  tense, — "  witnesseth,*' — is  a 
strong  proof  of  it.  John  the  Baptist's  testimony  was  a  thing 
past  and  gone. — Our  Lord  declares  that  His  Father  had  borne 
distinct  testimony  to  Him,  and  supphed  abundant  evidence,  if 
they,  the  Jews,  would  only  receive  it.  And  He  adds,  "his  tes- 
timony is  true."  He  will  never  bear  witness  to  a  lie. — Then 
having  laid  down  this  general  proposition,  He  goes  on  to  show 
the  threefold  testimony  which  God  had  provided : — first,  John 
the  Baptist; — secondly,  the  miracles  which  the  Father  had  com- 
missioned Him  to  work ; — and,  thirdly,  the  Scriptures. 

The  expression,  "  I  know,"  probably  imphes  the  deep  con- 
sciousness which  our  Lord  had,  even  in  His  humiUation,  of  His 
Father's  perfect  righteousness  and  truthfulness.  It  means  much 
more  than  a  mere  man's  "  I  know."  "  I  know  and  have  known 
from  all  eternity  that  my  Father's  testimony  is  perfect  truth." 

33. — [Ye  sent  unto  John,  etc.]  In  this  sentence  the  word  "ye  "  must 
be  taken  emphatically.  It  is  "  ye  yourselves."  The  meaning  of 
the  verse  seems  to  be, — "  My  first  witness  is  John  the  Baptist. 
Now  ye  yourselves  sent  unto  him  at  an  early  period  of  his  min- 
istry, and  ye  know  that  he  told  you  One  greater  than  himself  was 
coming,  whose  messenger  he  was,  and  that  afterwards  he  said  of 
Me,  '  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God.'  You  cannot  deny  that  he  was 
a  prophet  indeed.  Yet  he  bore  faithful  witness  unto  Me.  He 
told  you  the  truth." 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  our  Lord  refers  to  the  formal  mission 
of  *'  priests  and  Levites  from  Jerusalem  "  to  John  the  Baptist, 
described  in  John  i.  19. 

34. — [But  Ireceive  not  testimony  from  man,  efc]  This  sentence  seems 
meant  to  remind  the  Jews  that  they  must  not  suppose  our  Lord 
depended  either  solely  or  chiefly  on  man's  testimony.  "Not 
that  I  would  have  you  think  I  rest  My  claim  to  be  received  as 
the  Messiah  on  the  witness  of  John  the  Baptist,  or  of  any  other 
man.  But  I  say  these  things  about  John  and  his  witness  to  Me 
in  order  to  remind  you  of  what  you  heard  him  say,  and  that 
remembering  his  testimony  to  Me  you  may  believe  and  be  saved." 

Here,  as  elsewhere,  we  should  note  how  our  Lord  presses  home 
on  the  Jews  the  inconsistency  of  admitting  John  the  Baptist  to 
be  a  prophet  sent  from  God,  while  they  refused  to  believe  Him- 
self as  the  Messiah.  If  they  believed  John  they  ought  in  consis- 
tency to  have  believed  Him.  (See  Matt.  xxi.  23 — 27.) 

35. — [He  was  a  hu7ming.. .light]  This  is  very  high  testimony  to 
John.  Doubtless  he  was  not  "  the  light,"  as  Christ  was.  But 
still  he  was  not  an  ordinary  lamp  lighted  from  above,  as  all  true 
believers  are.     He  was  pre-eminently  "  the  lamp,'*  a  lamp  of 


JOHN,   CHAP.   Y.  307 

peculiar  power  and  brilliancy,  a  *'  burning  "  and  a  "  shining"  light 
like  a  flaming  beacon  or  light-house  seen  from  afar. 

I  think  the  expression  ''  he  was  "  shows  that  at  the  time  when 
our  Lord  spoke,  John  the  Baptist  was  either  in  prison  or  dead. 
At  any  rate  his  public  ministry  was  ended.  "  He  used  to  be  a 
light.     He  is  burning  and  shining  no  longer." 

Chrysostora  remarks, — "  He  called  John  a  torch  or  lamp,  sig- 
nifying that  he  had  not  light  of  himself,  but  by  the  grace  of  the 
Spirit." 

[  Ye  were  willing  for  a  season  to  rejoice^  This  refers  to  the  ex- 
traordinary popularity  and  acceptance  of  John  the  Baptist  when 
his  ministry  first  began.  "  Then  went  out  unto  him  Jerusalem 
and  all  Judasa,  and  all  the  country  round  about  Jordan."  (Matt, 
iii.  5.)  "  Many  of  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  came  to  his 
baptism."  (Matt.  iii.  7.)  It  was  an  ignorant  excitement  that 
brought  many  of  John's  hearers  to  him.  They  thought  most  pro- 
bably, that  the  Messiah,  of  whom  he  spoke,  and  whose  way  he 
came  to  prepare,  would  be  a  temporal  king  and  conqueror,  and 
would  give  to  Israel  its  old  pre-eminence  on  earth.  But  be  the 
motives  what  they  miglit,  the  fact  remains  that  John's  ministry 
attracted  immense  attention,  and  awakened  the  curiosity  of  the 
whole  Jewish  nation.  "They  willingly  rejoiced  in  the  light 
which  John  lifted  up,"  They  seemed  to  take  pleasure  in  coming 
to  him,  hearing  him,  following  him,  and  submitting  to  his  bap- 
tism. 

The  expression,  *'  for  a  season,"  seems  purposely  used  to  remind 
the  Jews  of  the  very  temporary  and  transitory  nature  of  the  im- 
pressions which  John's  ministry  produced  on  them. 

Stier  remarks, — "Man  generally,  even  a  prophet,  can  only  give 
light  by  burning,  like  a  lighted  candle,  until  he  is  burnt  out,  and 
his  mission  on  earth  ceases.  Thus  did  the  Baptist  burn,  brightly 
but  rapidly." 

Burkitt  remarks, — "  It  has  been  an  old  practice  among  profes- 
sors not  to  like  their  pastors  long,  though  they  have  been  never 
such  burning  and  shining  lights,  John  was  not  changed,  but  his 
hearers  were  changed.  He  did  burn  and  shine  in  the  candlestick 
with  equal  zeal  and  lustre  to  the  last,  but  they  had  changed  their 
thoughts  of  him," 

3. — \^But  I  h-ave  greater  witness. ..John^  This  means,  "  although 
John  the  Baptist  was  a  witness  to  My  being  the  Messiah,  and  the 
Son  of  God,  his  was  not  the  only  testimony  I  bid  you  receive. 
There  is  testimony  even  more  important  than  his,  namely,  that 
My  miracles."  The  Greek  means  literally,  "  the  greater  wit- 
ness;"— "  The  witness  tiiat  I  l^ve  is  greater." 


808        .  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Flacius  suggests  that  our  Lord  here  and  in  the  preceding  verse 
reminds  the  Jews  how  willing  they  were  at  first  to  receive 
John's  ministry,  and  almost  seemed  to  think  he  was  the  Messiah. 
Yet  all  this  time  "John  did  no  miracle." — But  when  the  true 
Messiah  appeared,  doing  mighty  "  works,"  the  Jews  did  not  show 
him  even  as  much  attention  as  they  had  shown  to  John. 

l^Tlie  worTcs... Father  hath  given,  etc.]  This  is  a  distinct  appeal  to 
miracles,  as  an  important  proof  of  our  Lord's  Messiahship  and 
Divinity.  Four  times  in  this  Gospel  we  find  the  same  appeal. 
(John  iii.  2;  x.  25 ;  xv.  24.)  The  evidence  of  miracles  should 
never  be  hghtly  esteemed.  We  are  apt  to  underrate  their  value 
because  they  were  wrought  so  long  ago.  But  in  the  days  when 
they  were  wrought  they  were  great  facts,  which  demanded  the 
attention  of  all  who  saw  them,  and  could  not  be  evaded.  Unless 
the  Jews  could  explain  them  away,  they  were  bound,  as  honest 
and  reasonable  men,  to  believe  our  Lord's  Divine  mission.  That 
they  really  were  wrought  the  Jews  never  appear  to  have  denied. 
In  fact  they  dared  not  attempt  to  deny  them.  What  they  did 
do  wjis  to  ascribe  them  to  Satanic  agency.  All  who  attempt  to 
deny  the  reality  of  our  Lord's  miracles  in  the  present  d  y,  would 
do  well  to  remember  that  those  who  had  the  best  opportunity 
of  judging,  namely,  the  men  who  saw  these  miracles,  and  lived 
within  hearing  of  them,  never  disputed  the  fact  that  they  were 
wrought.  If  the  enemies  of  our  Lord  could  have  proved  that  His 
miracles  were  only  tricks,  legerdemain,  and  impostures,  it  stands 
to  reason  they  would  have  been  only  too  glad  to  show  it  to  the 
world,  and  to  silence  Him  for  ever. 

Five  things  should  always  be  noted  about  our  Lord's  miracles. 
(1.)  Their  number :  they  were  not  a  few  only,  but  very  many 
indeed.  (2.)  Their  greatness :  they  were  not  little,  but  mighty 
interferences  with  the  ordinary  course  of  nature.  (3.)  Their 
puhlicity :  they  were  generally  not  done  in  a  corner,  but  in  open 
day,  and  before  many  witnesses,  and  often  before  enemies.  (4.) 
Their  character :  they  were  almost  always  works  of  love,  mercy, 
and  compassion,  helpful  and  beneficial  to  man,  and  not  mere 
barren  exhibitions  of  power.  (5.)  Their  direct  appeal  to  mens 
senses :  they  were  visible,  and  would  bear  any  examination.  The 
difference  between  them  and  the  boasted  miracles  of  the  Church 
of  Rome,  on  all  these  points,  is  striking  and  instructive. 

The  iiianner  in  which  our  Lord  speaks  of  His  miracles  is  very 
remarkable.  He  calls  them, — "  The  worlds  that  the  Father  hath 
given  me  that  I  should  finish."  He  carefully  avoids  the  appear- 
ance of  want  of  unity  between  the  Father  and  Himself,  even  in 
the  working  of  miracles.  They  are  not  works  which  He  did  of 
His  own  independent  will,  but  "  works  which  the  Father  hath 
given  me,"  works  which  it  had  been  arranged  in  the  eternal 


JOHN,    CHAP.   V.  809 

counsels  the  Son  should  work,  when  He  became  man  and  dwelt 
upon  earth.  Precisely  the  same  expression  is  used  elsewhere 
about  "  the  words  "  our  Lord  spake,  as  here  about  "  the  works:" 
"I  have  given  unto  them  the  words  which  tliou  gavest  me." 
(John  xvii.  8.) 

37. — [And  the  Father  himself. ...witness  of  me^  There  is  undeniable 
difficulty  about  these  words.  It  is  not  clear  to  what  "  witness 
of  the  Father  "  our  Lord  here  refers. 

(a..)  Some,  as  Chrysostom,  Brentius,  Bullinger,  Grualter,  Ferus, 
Toletus,  Barradius,  Cartwright,  Chemnitius,  Rollock,  Jansenius, 
Trapp,  Baxter,  Hammond,  Burkitt,  Lampe,  Bengel,  Henry,  Scott, 
Gill,  think  that  our  Lord  refers  to  the  audible  testimony  borne  to 
Him  by  the  Father  at  His  baptism,  and  at  the  transfiguration, 
when  He  said, — "This  is  my  beloved  Son,  hear  him."  (Matt.  iii. 
17  ;  xvii.  5.)  But  it  surely  is  a  capital  objection  to  this  theory, 
that  this  voice  of  the  Father  was  in  all  probability  heard  by  no- 
body excepting  John  the  Baptist  at  the  baptism,  and  Peter, 
James,  and  John  at  the  transfiguration.  At  this  rate  it  would 
be  entirely  a  private  testimony,  and  of  no  avail  to  the  general 
body  of  the  Jewish  nation. 

(b.)  Some,  as  Theophylact,  Euthymius,  Eupertus,  Calvin,  Coc- 
ceius,  Pearce,  Tholuck,  Bloomfield,  Tittman,  A.  Clark,  D.  Brown, 
Alforcl,  Burgon,  think  that  our  Lord  refers  to  the  testimony  the 
Father  has  borne  to  Him  generally  throughout  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Scriptures,  and  that  the  sentence  before  us  should  be  taken 
in  close  connection  with  the  next  verse  but  one,  beginning, 
"  Search  the  Scriptures."  In  fact  that  expression  would  then 
be  the  explanation  of  our  Lord's  meaning. 

Of  the  two  views  I  decidedly  prefer  the  second  one.  It  cer- 
tainly seems  the  least  difficult,  and  open  to  the  fewest  objections. 
There  is  a  third  view,  supported  by  Olshausen  and  Bucer,  viz., 
that  the  "  witness  "  here  means  the  inwarrd  witness  of  the  Spirit 
in  the  hearts  of  believers.  This,  however,  appears  to  me  wholly 
out  of  the  question.  It  is  a  witness  that  would  be  useless  to  the 
world  at  large. 

Both  here  and  elsewhere  we  must  take  care  that  we  do  not 
attach  the  idea  of  "  inferiority  "  to  the  expression  ''  sent '"  by 
the  Father.  Rollock  remarks, — "  It  is  quite  possible  that  an 
equal  may  send  an  equal  to  dib^harge  some  office."  Cyril 
remarks, — "  Mission  and  obedience,  being  sent  and  obeying, 
do  not  take  away  equality  of  power  in  the  sender  and  the  sent 
one." 

[  Ye  have  neither  heard.... seen  his  shape.^  This  appears  to  be  a 
parenthetical  sentence,  as  well  as  the  verse  that  follows.  It 
certainly  seems  to  strengthen  the  view  that  when  our  Lord  spoka 


310  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

of  His  Father  •'  bearing  witness,"  He  could  not  have  meant  the 
audible  witness  of  His  voice  at  the  baptism  or  transfiguration. 
In  fact  the  sentence  seems  purposely  to  preclude  the  notion.  It 
is  as  though  our  Lord  said,  "  Do  not  suppose  that  I  mean  any 
audible  testimony  of  voice,  or  apparition,  or  vision,  when  I  speak 
of  My  Father  bearing  witness  to  me.  I  mean  testimony  of  a 
very  different  kind,  even  the  testimony  of  His  Word." 

The  expression  "  not  seen  His  shape,"  teaches  the  same  great 
truth  we  find  elsewhere, — viz.,  that  the  Father  is  invisible,  and 
has  never  been  seen  by  mortal  man.  He  who  appeared  to  Abra- 
ham was  the  Second  Person  of  the  Trinity,  and  not  the  Father. 
St.  Paul  says  distinctly  of  the  Father, — "  whom  no  man  hath 
seen,  nor  can  see."  (1  Tim.  vi.  17.)  The  idea  of  artists  and 
painters,  when  they  represent  the  Father  as  an  aged  man,  is  a 
mere  irreverent  invention  of  their  own  brains,  without  the 
slightest  warrant  of  Scripture. 

Rupertus  and  Ferus  suggest  that  the  latter  part  of  this  verso 
was  spoken  to  prevent  the  Jews  thinking  that  our  Lord  spoke 
of  Joseph,  His  supposed  father.  This,  however,  seems  a  rather 
improbable  and  fanciful  idea. 

38. — [And  ye  have  not  his  word,  Sc]  This  verse  seems  meant  to 
remind  the  Jews  that  with  all  their  pretended  reverence  for  Grod, 
and  affected  zeal  against  blasphemies  of  Him,  they  were  really 
ignorant  of  God's  mind.  Their  reverence  for  Him  was  only  a 
form.  Their  zeal  for  Him  was  a  blind  fanaticism.  They  knew 
no  more  of  His  mind  than  of  His  shape  or  voice.  They  Avere 
not  acquainted  with  His  Word.  It  did  not  dwell  in  their  hearts 
and  guide  their  rehgion.  They  proved  their  own  ignorance  by 
not  believing  Him  whom  the  Father  had  sent.  Had  they  really 
been  familiar  with  the  writings  of  the  Old  Testament  they  would 
have  believed. 

Our  Lord  evidently  implies  that  real  knowledge  of  God's  Word 
will  always  lead  a  man  to  faith  in  Christ.  Where  there  is  no 
faith  we  may  rightly  assume  the  Bible  is  either  not  read,  or  read 
in  a  wrong  spirit.     Ignorance  and  unbelief  will  go  together. 

Locke  holds  the  curious  opinion,  that  the  "  word"  in  this  verse 
means  the  "  Personal  Word,"  as  at  John  i.  1.  "  Ye  have  not 
Me,  the  Eternal  Word,  dwelling  in  your  hearts."  But  Christ 
nowhere  calls  Himself  "  the  Word,"  and  the  idea  does  not  har- 
monize with  the  context. 

Ecolampadius  thinks  that  in  this  and  the  preceding  verse  there 
is  a  reference  to  Deut.  xviii.  15 — 19,  where  the  Lord  promised  a 
prophet  to  the  Jews  like  unto  Moses,  because  they  had  said, — • 
"  Let  me  not  hear  again  the  voice  of  the  Lord  my  God,  neither 
let  me  see  this  great  fire  any  more,  that  I  die  not."     He  thinks 


JOHX,    CHAP.   V.  311 

ctir  Lord  reminds  them  of  this.  God  had  fulfilled  His  promise, 
and  sent  them  a  prophet  like  unto  Moses,  and  now  they  would 
not  believe  on  Him  ! 

69. — [Search  the  Scriptures.']     This  famous  sentence  is  interpreted 
two  different  ways. 

(a.)  Some,  as  Cyril,  Erasmus,  Ecolampadins,  Beza,  Brentius, 
Piscator,  Camero,  Poole,  Toletus,  Lightfoot,  Lampe,  Bengel, 
Doddridge,  Bloomfield,  Tholuck,  A.  Clark,  Scholefield,  Barnes, 
Burgon,  D.  Brown,  Webster,  think  that  our  Lord  spoke  in  the 
indicative  mood,  simply  making  an  assertion, — "  Ye  do  search." 

(&.)  Some,  as  Chrysostom,  Augustine,  Theophylact,  Euthy- 
mius,  Luther,  Calvin,  Cartwright,  Gualter,  Grotius,  Rollock, 
Ferus,  Calovius,  Jansenius,  Cocceius,  Barradius,  Musculus,  Nifa- 
nius,  Maldonatns,  Cornehus  ^  Lapide,  Leigh,  Whitby,  Hammond, 
Slier,  Alford,  Wordsworth,  think  that  He  spoke  in  the  impe- 
rative mood,  giving  a  command, — "  Search," — as  our  version 
gives  it. 

I  decidedly  prefer  this  latter  view.  It  is  more  forcible,  and 
more  in  keeping  with  our  Lord's  general  style  of  address.  Above 
all  it  seems  to  me  to  agree  far  better  with  the  context.  Our 
Lord  had  told  the  Jews  that  His  Fatiier  had  borne  witness  of 
Him,  though  not  by  audible  voice,  nor  by  visible  apparition. 
How  then  had  He  borne  witness  ?  They  would  find  it  in  His 
Word.  "  Go  and  search  your  own  Scriptures,"  our  Lord  seems 
to  say.  "  Examine  them,  and  become  really  acquainted  with 
their  contents;  you  will  find  that  they  testify  clearly  and  dis- 
tinctly of  Me.  If  you  wish  to  know  God  the  Father's  testimony 
to  Me,  search  the  Scriptures." 

The  word  rendered  *'  search"  means  "  search  minutely  and 
diligently."  It  appears  to  me  intentionally  used,  to  show  thnt 
the  Jews  should  not  be  content  with  mere  reading.  The  Sep- 
tuagint  version  of  Prov.  ii.  4,  has  an  expression  like  it. 

Chrysostom  remarks, — "  When  Christ  referred  the  Jews  to  the 
Scriptures,  He  sent  them  not  to  a  mere  reading,  but  to  a  careful 
and  considerate  search.  He  said  not,  'read,'  but,  'search,' 
Since  the  sayings  about  Him  required  great  attention  (for  they 
had  been  concealed  from  the  beginning  for  the  advantage  of  men 
of  that  time).  He  bids  them  now  dig  down  with  care,  that  they 
might  discern  what  lay  in  the  depths  below.  These  saying'?  were 
not  on  the  surface,  nor  were  they  cast  forth  to  open  view,  but 
lay  like  some  treasure  hidden  very  deep," 

Some,  who  think  the  word  "search"  should  be  taken  as  an 
indicative,  ''ye  search,"  maintain  that  our  Lord  spoke  ironically, 
and  meant,  "  Ye  pretend  to  make  a  minute  investigation  of 
Scripture,  and  search  into  ths  letter  of  it,  but  never  get  any 


812  EXPOSITORY    THOUGHTS. 

further."  I  can  see  little  ground  for  this  view.  The  Tvord 
"  search"  is  never  used  in  a  bad  sense  in  Scripture  (1  Pet.  i.  11.) 
The  chief  argument  in  favour  of  the  "  indicative"  side  of  the  ques- 
tion is  the  notorious  Rabbinical  custom  of  minutely  scrutinizing 
and  reverencing  every  syllable  of  Scripture.  To  this  custom  of 
honouring  the  letter  of  Scripture,  while  neglecting  its  spirit, 
many  advocates  of  the  "indicative"  here  think  that  our  Lord 
referred.  Brentius  gives  a  full  account  of  the  length  to  which 
the  Jews  went  in  their  reverence  for  the  letter  of  Scripture, 
such  as  counting  the  letters  of  each  book,  etc.,  and  thinks  that 
this  was  in  our  Lord's  mind.  I  cannot  however  agree  with  this 
view. 

[In  them  ye  think  ye  have  eternal  life.]  In  this  sentence  the 
first  "  ye"  must  be  taken  emphatically,  as  in  the  33rd  verse. 
"  Think"  does  not  imply  that  it  was  a  doubtful  point,  or  mere 
matter  of  opinion.  It  is  rather,  "  Ye  yourselves  think,  and  think 
rightly, — it  is  one  of  the  dogmas  of  your  faith, — that  ye  have  in 
the  Scriptures  the  way  to  eternal  life  pointed  out." 

Chemnitius  remarks, — "The  words  'ye  think'  mean  that 
common  persuasion  and  opinion  of  all  men  concerning  Scrip- 
ture, which,  like  an  axiom  in  science,  is  established,  firm,  and 
certain." 

Let  it  be  noted  that  many  Christians  are  just  in  the  unsatis- 
factory state  of  the  Jews  here  described.  Like  them,  they 
"  think,"  and  hold  it  as  a  dogma  of  their  creed,  that  they  "  have 
eternal  life  in  the  Scriptures."  But,  like  them,  they  never  read, 
mark,  learn,  and  inwardly  digest  what  Scripture  contains. 

Ecolampadius  remarks, — "Scripture  alone  does  not  make  a 
man  any  the  better,  nor  even  preaching,  by  itself,  except  by 
the  Holy  Grhost  aiding.  It  is  the  peculiar  otiice  of  the  externa! 
Word  to  supply  testimony ;  but  it  is  the  Spirit  of  God  alone  that 
can  make  the  heart  of  man  assent." 

[They  are  they  which  testify  of  me.]  This  sentence  is  a  strong 
and  weighty  declaration  of  the  value  of  the  Old  Testament 
Scriptures.  It  was  to  them  exclusively,  of  course,  that  our  Lord 
referred.  He  says,  "they  testify  of  me."  In  direct  prophecies, 
in  promises,  in  typical  persons,  in  typical  ceremonies,  the  Old 
Testament  Scripture  all  through  testifies  of  Christ.  We  read 
thein  to  very  little  purpose  if  we  do  not  discern  this. 

Ferus  remarks  that  there  are  three  ways  in  which  the  Scrip- 
tures testify  of  Christ.  (1.)  Generally:  they  are  as  it  were  the 
voice  of  the  uncreated  Word,  ever  speaking  to  man  in  every 
part  of  them.  (2.)  In  figures:  the  paschal  lamb,  the  brazen 
.  serpent,  and  all  the  sacrifices  of  the  law  were  witnesses  of  Christ. 
(3.)  In  direct  proj.hecies. 


JOHN,    CHAP.    V. 


813 


Let  us  note  in  this  verse  the  high  honour  which  our  Lord  puts 
on  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures.  He  distinctly  endorses  the 
Jewish  Canon  of  in^^pired  writings.  Those  modern  wrirers 
who  kbour  to  depreciate  them,  and  bring  them  Into  disrepute, 
show  very  lit  lie  of  Christ's  mujd.  Much  infidelity  begins  with 
an  ignorant  contempt  of  the  Old  Testament.  Stier  remarks, — 
*'  Israel,  possessing  still  the  Old  Testament,  will  enter  into  the 
kingdom,  when  the  despisers  of  Scripture  in  the  final  unbelief 
of  Christendom  will  be  judged  and  condemned," 

Let  us  note  further  what  a  plain  duty  it  is  to  read  the  Scrip- 
tures. Men  have  no  right  to  expect  spiritual  hght  if  they  ne- 
glect the  great  treasury  of  all  light.  If  even  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment our  Lord  said,  "Search,"  " it  testifies  of  me,"  how  much 
more  is  it  a  duty  to  search  the  whole  Bible  I  An  idle  neglect  of 
the  Bible  is  one  secret  of  the  ignorant  formal  Christianity  which 
is  so  widely  prevalent  in  these  latter  days.  God's  blessing  on  a 
dihgent  study  of  the  Scripture  is  strikingly  illustrated  in  the  case 
of  the  Bereans.  (Acts  xvii.  11.) 


JOHN  Y.  40— 47. 


■tO  And  ye  will  not  come  to  me, 
that  je  might  have  Ufe. 

41  I  receive  not  hoiKxir  from 
men. 

42  But  I  know  you,  that  ye  have 
not  the  love  of  God  in  you. 

43  I  am  come  in  my  Father's 
name,  and  ye  receive  me  not:  if  an- 
other shall  come  in  his  own  name, 
hhn  ye  will  receive. 

44  How  can  ye  believe,  which 
receive  honour  one  of  another,  and 


seek  not  the  honour  that  cometh 
from  God  only? 

45  Do  not  think  that  I  wiU  ac- 
cuse you  to  the  Father :  there  is  one 
that  accuseth  you,  even  Moses,  in 
whom  ye  trust. 

46  For  had  ye  believed  Moses, 
ye  would  have  believed  me ;  for  he 
wrote  of  me. 

47  But  if  ye  beheve  not  his  writ- 
ings, how  shall  ye  believe  my 
words  ? 


This  passage  concludes  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ's  wondrous 
defence  of  His  own  divine  mission.  It  is  a  conclusion 
worthy  of  the  defence,  full  of  heart- searching  appeals  to 
the  consciences  of  His  enemies,  and  rich  in  deep  truths. 
A  mighty  sermon  is  followed  by  a  mighty  application. 

Let  us  mark,  in  this  passage,  the  reaso7i  why  many  souls 
are  lost.  The  Lord  Jesus  says  to  the  unbelieving  Jews, 
— "  Ye  will  not  come  to  me  that  ye  might  have  life." 

14 


314  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

These  words  are  a  golden  sentence,  which  ought  to 
be  engraven  in  our  memories,  and  treasured  up  in  our 
minds.  It  is  want  of  will  to  come  to  Christ  for  salvation 
that  will  be  found,  at  last,  to  have  shut  the  many  out  of 
heaven, — It  is  not  men's  sins.  All  manner  of  sin  may  be 
forgiven. — It  is  not  any  decree  of  God.  We  are  not  told 
in  the  Bible  of  any  whom  God  has  only  created  to  be  de- 
stroyed,— It  is  not  any  limit  in  Christ's  work  of  redemp- 
tion. He  has  paid  a  price  suflScient  for  all  mankind. — It  is 
something  far  more  than  this.  It  is  man's  own  innate  un- 
willingness to  come  to  Christ,  repent,  and  believe.  Either 
from  pride,  or  laziness,  or  love  of  sin,  or  love  of  the  world, 
the  many  have  no  mind,  or  wish,  or  heart,  or  desire  to 
seek  life  in  Christ.  "  God  has  given  to  us  eternal  life,  and 
this  life  is  in  his  Son."  (1  John  v.  11  >)  But  men  stand 
still,  and  will  not  stir  hand  or  foot  to  get  life.  And  this 
is  the  whole  reason  why  many  of  the  lost  are  not  saved. 

This  is  a  painful  and  solemn  truth,  but  one  that  we  can 
never  know  too  well.  It  contains  a  first  principle  in  Chris- 
tian theology.  Thousands,  in  every  age,  are  constantly 
labouring  to  shift  the  blame  of  their  condition  from  off 
themselves.  They  talk  of  their  inability  to  change.  They 
tell  you  complacently,  that  they  cannot  help  being  what 
they  are  !  They  know,  forsooth,  that  they  are  wrong,  but 
they  cannot  be  different ! — It  will  not  do.  Such  talk  will 
not  stand  the  test  of  the  Word  of  Christ  before  us.  The 
unconverted  are  what  they  are  because  they  have  no  will 
to  be  better.  *'  Light  is  come  into  the  world,  and  men 
love  darkness  rather  than  light."  (John  iii.  19.)  The 
words  of  the  Lord  Jesus  wUl  silence  many :  "  I  would 
have  gathered  you,  and  ye  would  not  be  gathered." 
(Matt,  xxiii.  37.) 

Let  us  mark,  secondly,  in  this  passage,  one  pinncipal 
cause  of  unbelief.  The  Lord  Jesus  says  to  the  Jews, — 
*'How   can    ve    believe   which    receive   honour   one    of 


JOHN,    CHAP.   V.  315 

another,  and  seek  not  the  honour  that  cometh  of  God 
only?"  He  meant  by  that  saying,  that  they  were  not 
honest  in  their  reh'gion.  With  all  their  apparent  desire 
to  hear  and  learn,  they  cared  more  in  reality  for  pleasing 
man  than  God.  In  this  state  of  mind  they  were  never 
likely  to  believe. 

A  deep  principle  is  contained  in  this  saying  of  our  Lord's, 
and  one  that  deserves  special  attention.  True  faith  does 
not  depend  merely  on  the  state  of  man's  head  and  under- 
standing, but  on  the  state  of  his  heart.  His  mind  may  be 
convinced.  His  conscience  may  be  pricked.  But  so  long 
as  there  is  anything  the  man  is  secretly  loving  more  than 
God,  there  will  be  no  true  faith.  The  man  himself  may 
be  puzzled,  and  wonder  why  he  does  not  believe.  He 
does  not  see  that  he  is  like  a  child  sitting  on  the  lid  of 
his  box,  and  wishing  to  open  it,  but  not  considering  that 
his  own  weight  keeps  it  shut.  Let  a  man  make  sure  that 
he  honestly  and  really  desires  first  the  praise  of  God.  It  is 
the  want  of  an  honest  heart  which  makes  many  stick  fast 
in  their  religion  all  their  days,  and  die  at  length  without 
peace.  Those  who  complain  that  they  hear,  and  approve, 
and  assent,  but  make  no  progress,  and  cannot  get  any  hold 
on  Christ,  should  ask  themselves  this  simple  question, 
— "  Am  I  honest  ? — Am  I  sincere  ? — Do  I  really  desire 
first  the  praise  of  God  ?" 

Let  us  mark,  lastly,  in  this  passage,  the  manner  in 
which  Christ  speaks  of  Moses.  He  says  to  the  Jews, — 
"  Had  ye  believed  Moses  ye  would  have  believed  me :  for 
he  wrote  of  me." 

These  words  demand  our  special  attention  in  these 
latter  days.  That  there  really  was  such  a  person  as 
Moses, — ^that  he  really  was  the  author  of  the  writings 
commonly  ascribed  to  him, — on  both  these  points  our 
Lord's  testimony  is  distinct.  "  He  wrote  of  me."  Can 
we  suppose  for  a  moment  that  our  Lord  was  only  accom- 


816  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

modating  Himself  to  the  prejudices  and  traditions  of  Hia 
hearers,  and  that  He  spoke  of  Moses  as  a  writer,  though 
He  knew  in  His  heart  that  Moses  never  wrote  at  all? 
Such  an  idea  is  profane.  It  would  make  out  our  Lord 
to  have  been  dishonest. — Can  we  suppose  for  a  moment 
that  our  Lord  was  ignorant  about  Moses,  and  did  not 
know  the  wonderful  discoveries  which  learned  men, 
falsely  so  called,  have  made  in  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury ?  Such  an  idea  is  ridiculous  blasphemy.  To 
imagine  the  Lord  Jesus  speaking  ignorantly  in  such  a 
chapter  as  the  one  before  us,  is  to  strike  at  the  root  of 
all  Christianity. — There  is  but  one  conclusion  about  the 
matter.  There  was  such  a  person  as  Moses.  The  writings 
commonly  ascribed  to  him.  were  written  by  him.  The 
facts  recorded  in  them  are  worthy  of  all  credit.  Our 
Lord's  testimony  is  an  unanswerable  argument.  The 
sceptical  writers  against  Moses  and  the  Pentateuch  have 
greatly  erred. 

Let  us  beware  of  handling  the  Old  Testament  irreve- 
rently, and  allowing  our  minds  to  doubt  the  truth  of  any 
part  of  it,  because  of  alleged  difficulties.  The  simple  fact 
that  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  continually  refer 
to  the  Old  Testament,  and  speak  even  of  the  most 
miraculous  events  recorded  in  it  as  undoubtedly  true, 
should  silence  our  doubts^  Is  it  at  all  likely,  probable, 
or  credible,  that  we  of  the  nineteenth  century  are  better 
informed  about  Moses  than  Jesus  and  His  Apostles  ?  God 
forbid  that  we  should  think  so !  Then  let  us  stand  fast, 
and  not  doubt  that  every  word  in  the  Old  Testament,  as 
well  as  in  the  New,  was  given  by  inspiration  of  God. 

Notes.    John  Y.  40 — il. 

40. — [And  ye  will  not  come  to  me..Jife.]  The  connection  between 
this  verse  and  the  preceding  one  is  not  very  clear.  It  is  one  of 
those  abrupt  elliptical  transitions  which  occur  frequently  in  St, 


JOHN,    CHAP.   V.  817 

John's  writings.  I  conjecture  tlie  link  must  be  soraeth.^og  of  this 
kind :  "  Tlie  Scriptures  testify  plainly  of  Me.  A7-cd  yet  in  the  face 
of  this  testimony  ye  have  no  will  or  inchnatioa  to  come  to  Ma 
by  faith,  that  ye  may  have  eternal  hfe  through  Me." 

This  verse  evidently  begins  the  third  part  of  our  Lord's  address 
to  the  Jews.  He  had  declared  the  relation  between  Himself  and 
God  the  Father,  He  had  brought  forward  the  evidence  of  His 
own  Divine  commission,  and  His  claim  to  be  received  as  tho 
Messiah,  And  now  He  concludes  by  a  most  heart-piercing 
appeal  to  the  consciences  of  His  enemies,  in  which  He  exposes 
the  true  state  of  their  hearts,  and  the  real  reasons  why  they  did 
not  believe  in  Him.  If  ever  men  were  plainly  dealt  with,  and 
received  home- thrusts  as  to  their  own  spiritual  condition,  it  was 
on  this  occasion.  In  reading  the  conclusion  of  this  chapter,  one 
cannot  but  feel  that  a  miraculous  restraint  must  have  been  put 
on  our  Lord's  enemies.  Otherwise  it  is  difficult  to  understand 
how  they  could  have  allowed  Him  to  bring  such  cutting  and  truth- 
ful charges  against  them.  If  ministers  desire  a  warrant  for  deal- 
ing plainly  with  their  hearers,  and  addressing  them  directly  and 
personally  about  their  sins,  they  have  only  to  look  at  their  Divine 
blaster's  words  in  this  passage. 

The  opening  charge  that  our  Lord  makes,  "  Ye  will  not  come 
to  me,"  misses  much  of  its  force  in  the  English  language.  It  is 
not  the  future  tense  of  "  come  "  that  is  used  in  the  G-reek.  Two 
distinct  verbs  are  employed.  The  right  meaning  is,  "  Ye  do  not 
will  to  come," — "  Ye  have  no  heart,  desire,  or  inclination  to  come 
to  Me." 

Let  it  be  noted  here  that  (1.)  we  are  all  by  nature  dead  in 
sins; — that  (2.)  spiritual  life  is  laid  up  for  sinners  in  Christ  alone ; 
He  is  the  fountain  of  life; — that  (3.)  in  order  to  receive  benefit 
from  Christ  men  must  come  to  him  by  faith,  and  believe:  be- 
lieving is  coming; — and,  finally,  (4.)  that  the  real  reasons  why 
men  do  not  come  to  Christ,  and  consequently  die  in  their  sins,  is 
their  want  of  will  to  come. 

Let  it  be  carefully  noted,  that  both  here  and  elsewhere  the  loss 
of  man's  soul  is  always  attributed  in  Scripture  to  man's  own 
want  of  will  to  be  saved.  It  is  not  any  decree  of  God.  It  is 
not  Grod's  unwilhngness  to  receive.  It  is  not  any  limitation  of 
Christ's  redeeming  work  and  atonement.  It  is  not  any  want  of 
wid^,  broad,  fiee,  full  invitations  to  repent  and  beheve.  It  is 
simply  and  entirely  man's  own  fault. — his  want  of  will.  For 
ever  let  us  cleave  to  this  doctrine.  Man's  salvation,  if  saved,  is 
entirely  of  God.  Man's  ruin,  if  lost,  is  entirely  of  himself.  He 
"  loves  darkness  rather  than  hght."     He  will  have  his  own  way. 

We  should  observe  in  this  concluding  part  of  our  Lord's 
address,  Ihat  He  charges  the  Jews  with  four  distinct  sins:  (1.) 


818  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

want  of  real  w:Il  to  come  to  Him,  (2.)  want  of  real  love  to  God, 
(3.)  undue  desire  of  man's  praise,  (4.)  want  of  real  faith  in  Moses' 
writings. 

4.1. — [/  receive  not  honour  from  men.]  The  connection  between 
these  words  and  the  preceding  verse  is  again  not  very  clear.  I 
conjecture  that  it  must  be  as  follows : — "  I  do  not  say  these  things, 
as  if  I  desired  the  praise  and  honour  of  man.  I  do  not  complain 
of  your  not  coming  to  Me,  as  if  I  only  came  into  the  world  to 
seek  man's  praise.  It  is  not  on  My  own  account  that  I  mention 
your  unbelief,  but  on  yours,  because  it  shows  the  state  of  your 
hearts.  Do  not  suppose  that  I  stand  in  need  of  followers,  and 
am  covetous  of  man's  favour." 

42. — [But  I  know  you.. .not  the  love  of  God,  c&c]  The  sense  and 
connection  here  appear  to  be  as  follows : — "  But  the  plain  truth 
is,  that  I  know  and  have  long  known  the  state  of  your  hearts, 
and  I  know  that  you  have  no  real  love  of  God  in  you.  You 
profess  to  worship  the  one  true  God,  and  to  give  Him  honour. 
But  you  show  by  your  conduct,  that  with  all  your  profession  you 
do  not  really  love  God." 

To  a  Jewish  hearer  this  tremendous  charge  must  have  been 
peculiarly  galling.  It  was  a  charge  that  none  but  our  Lord 
could  make  with  equal  decision,  because  He  read  men's  hearts, 
and  knew  what  was  in  them. 

The  word  "  I  know  "  is  literally  "  I  have  known."  Alford 
paraphrases  the  sentence, — "  By  long  trial  and  bearing  with  your 
manners  these  many  generations,  and  personally  also,  I  have 
known,  and  do  know  you." 

In  another  place  we  find  our  Lord  naming  this  sin  as  one  of 
the  special  sins  of  the  Pharisees.  "Woe  unto  you,  Pharisees  I 
for  ye  tithe  mint  and  rue,  and  all  manner  of  herbs,  and  pass  over 
judgment  and  the  love  of  God."  (Luke  xi.  42.) 

Ferus  remarks  that  the  increduhty  of  the  Jews  did  not  arise 
from  want  of  evidence,  but  want  of  love  towards  God. 

43. — [7  am  cono^  in  my  Father's  name... receive  me  not]  This  sen- 
tence contains  a  proof  of  the  assertion  made  in  the  preceding 
verse.  "  You  show  that  you  have  no  real  love  for  God,  by  your 
not  receiving  Me  who  have  come  in  my  Father's  name,  and  de- 
sire nothing  so  much  as  His  honour.  If  you  really  loved  and 
honoured  God  as  you  professed  to  clo,  you  would  gladly  receive 
and  honour  His  Son." 

[Tf  another.. .in  his  own  name,  him  ye  will  receive^  In  this  sen- 
tence our  Lord  supposes  a  case,  to  show  the  corrupt  and  carnal 
state  of  the  Jews'  hearts.  "  If  another  pubHc  teacher  shall  appear, 
giving   himself  out  to  be  some  great  one,  not  seeking  God's 


319 

lionour,  and  doing  all  in  God's  name,  but  aiming  to  exalt  him- 
self, and  g<it  honour  to  himself,  you  will  receive  and  believe  him. 
You  reject  Me  the  true  Son  of  God.  You  are  ready  to  receive 
any  false  pretender  who  comes  among  you,  though  he  may  give 
no  honour  to  the  God  whom  you  profess  to  worship.  It  is  true 
then  that  you  have  no  real  love  of  God  in  you." 

I  beheve  decidedly  that  our  Lord  spoke  these  words  propheti- 
cally. He  had  in  view  the  many  false  Christs  and  false  Messiahs 
who  arose  within  the  first  hundred  years  after  His  desith,  and  by 
whom  ?o  many  of  the  Jews  were  invariably  deluded.  Accord- 
ing to  Stier  no  less  than  sixty-four  false  Messiahs  appeared  to 
them,  and  were  more  or  less  believed. 

The  readiness  with  which  they  believed  these  impostors  is  a 
remarkable  historical  fact,  and  a  striking  fulfilment  of  the  words 
before  us.  They  proved  as  forward  to  believe  these  pretenders 
to  a  Divine  mission  who  came  in  their  own  names,  as  they  had 
been  backward  to  believe  our  Lord. 

I  may  add,  however,  that  I  am  one  of  those  who  doubt 
whether  the  words  of  our  Lord  have  even  yet  received  their  com- 
plete fulfilment.  I  think  it  highly  probable  that  the  world  may 
yet  see  a  personal  Antichrist  arise,  who  will  succeed  in  obtain- 
ing credence  from  a  vast  portion  of  the  Jewish  nation.  Then, 
and  not  till  then,  when  Antichrist  has  appeared,  this  verse  will 
be  completely  accomphshed.  Chrysostom,  Cyril,  Theophylact, 
Euthymius,  Alcuin,  Heinsius,  take  this  view. 

Stier  remarks,  *'  He  of  whom  the  Lord  here  prophecies,  is 
finally  Antichrist,  with  his-open  and  avowed  denial  of  God  and 
of  Christ;  with  his  most  daring  'I,'  before  which  all  the  proud 
will  humbly  bow  down,  because  they  will  find  themselves  in 
him,  and  will  honour  him  as  their  true  God.  As  the  Father 
reveals  Himself  in  Christ,  so  will  Satan  manifest  himself  in  Anti- 
christ, and  give  him  all  his  work  and  witness,  and  his  own 
honour  as  the  prince  of  this  world  ;  and  the  wicked  will  yield 
themselves  to  him,  because  through  unbehef  they  have  already 
fallen  into  his  nature,  and  fitly  belong  to  him." 

Wordsworth  remarks,  "  The  Fathers  were  generally  of  opinion, 
grounded  on  this  passage,  that  Antichrist  would  be  received  by 
the  Jews." 

44. — [How  can  ye  helieve,  etc.,  etc.]  This  verse  contains  a  very 
important  principle.  The  substance  of  the  meaning  seems  to 
be  as  follows : — Our  Lord  tells  the  Jews  that  they  were  not 
likely  to  believe,  so  long  as  they  cared  more  for  the  praise  of 
man  than  the  praise  of  God.  The  true  cause  of  their  un- 
belief was  a  want  of  honesty  and  godly  sincerity.  With  all 
their  professed  zeal  for  God,  they  did  not  really  care  so  much 


320  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

for  pleasing  Him  as  for  pleasing  man.  In  this  state  of  mind 
they  were  never  Hkely  to  have  faith,  or  to  come  to  the  know- 
ledge of  the  truth.  "  How  can  ye  believe,  receiving  and  seek- 
ing honour  from  one  another  as  ye  do  now?"  It  is  not 
possible  that  you  can  believe,  until  you  cease  from  your  pre- 
sent earthly-mindedness,  and  honestly  desire  God's  praise  more 
than  man's. 

The  great  principle  contained  in  the  verse  is  the  close  connec- 
tion between  the  state  of  a  man's  heart  and  his  possessing  the 
gift  of  faith.  Believing  or  not  believing,  to  have  faith  or  not  to 
have  faith,  is  not  a  thing  that  depends  only  on  a  man's  head 
being  satisfied,  and  his  intellect  convinced.  It  depends  far 
more  on  the  state  of  a  man's  heart.  If  a  man  is  not  tlioroughly 
honest  in  his  professed  desire  to  find  out  the  truth  in  religion, — 
if  he  secretly  cherishes  any  idol  which  he  is  resolved  not  to  give 
up, — if  he  privately  cares  for  anything  more  than  God's  praise, 
: — he  wiU  go  on  to  the  end  of  his  days  doubting,  perplexed,  dis- 
satisfied, and  restless,  and  will  never  find  the  way  to  peace. 
His  insincerity  of  heart  is  an  insuperable  barrier  in  the  way  of 
his  believing.  There  is  a  mine  of  wisdom  in  the  expression, 
"An  honest  and  good  heart."  (Luke  viii.  15.)  For  want  of  it 
many  a  one  complains  that  he  cannot  get  comfort  in  religion, 
and  cannot  see  his  way  towards  heaven,  when  the  truth  is  that 
his  own  dishonesty  of  heart  is  the  cause.  There  is  something  he 
loves  more  than  God.  The  consequence  is  that  he  never  feels 
an  honest  will  to  believe. 

The  ''can"  in  this  verse  should  be  compared  with  the  "will" 
in  the  fortieth  verse.     "  Ye  cannot  because  ye  will  not." 

[From  God  only.]  This  expression  would  be  more  literally 
rendered,  "  from  the  only  God," — the  one  true  God,  whom  the 
Jews  boasted  that  they  alone  knew  and  worshipped. 

Doddridge  remarks  that  the  whole  verse  "  has  much  more 
spirit  in  it,  if  we  consider  it  as  applied  to  the  members  of  the 
Sanhedrim,  who  had  such  distinguished  titles  of  honour,  than  if 
we  only  take  it  as  spoken  to  a  mixed  multitude."  If,  as  many 
suppose,  our  Lord  was  making  a  formal  defence  of  Himself  and 
His  divine  mission  before  the  great  Ecclesiastical  Assembly  of 
the  Jews,  His  words  in  this  verse  would  come  home  to  His 
hearers  with  stinging  power. 

ib. — [Bo  not  think  that  J  will  accuse,  etc.]  We  must  not  suppose 
that  our  Lord  literally  meant  that  there  was  any  real  likelihood 
of  Moses  or  Himself  standing  up  to  make  a  formal  accusation 
ngainst  the  Jews.  What  He  did  mean  was,  that  not  to  believe 
Him  was  not  to  believe  Moses.  There  was  no  need  for  Him  to 
accuse  them  of  unbelief  Moses  himself,  for  whom  they  professed 
such  respect,  might  be   thoir  accuser,  and  prove  them   guilty. 


321 

"Even  now,"  He  says,  "Moses  accuseth  you.  His  writing's, 
daily  read  in  your  synagogue,  are  a  constant  witness  of  your 
unbelief."  There  may  also,  it  is  highly  probable,  be  a  reference 
here  to  the  Song  of  Moses,  where  he  predicts  the  unbelief  of  the 
people,  and  deshes  the  book  of  the  law  to  be  "  put  in  the  side 
of  the  ark,  that  it  may  be  there  for  a  witness  against  thee.' 
(Deut.  xxxii.  26.) 

Chemnitius  remarks,  ''What  the  Lord  says  to  the  Jews,  la 
exactly  as  if  I  were  to  say  to  the  Papists,  It  is  not  I,  but  the 
very  Fathers  whose  authority  ye  allege  in  favour  of  your  super- 
stition, who  will  accuse  you  of  impiety.  Or  as  if  we  were  to  say 
to  the  Pope,  It  is  not  we  who  accuse  and  condemn  tliee,  but 
C.irist  himself,  whose  vicar  thou  callest  thyself;  and  Petir  whose 
successor  thou  wilt  have  thyself:  and  Paul  whose  sw(  rd  thou 
pretendest  to  bear:  they  it  is  who  will  accuse  thee."  Btza 
makes  much  the  same  remark,  and  observes,  that  none  will  be 
more  opposed  to  the  Roman  Catholics  in  the  judgment-day  than 
the  Virgin  Mary  and  the  saints  in  whom  they  profess  to  trust! 

The  notion  of  some  Romanists  that  the  expression  "Moses  in 
whom  ye  trust,"  justifies  the  invocation  of  saints,  and  putting 
confidence  in  them  as  mediators,  is,  as  Chemnitius  observes,  too 
weak  and  groundless  to  need  refutation. 

46. — [For  had  ye  helieved  Moses me.]     These  words  are  simply 

an  amplification  of  the  idea  in  the  preceding  verse.  If  the  Jews 
had  really  believed  Moses,  they  could  not  have  helped  believing 
Christ.  The  witness  of  Moses  to  Christ,  was  so  distinct,  express, 
and  unmistakeable,  that  true  belief  in  his  writings  must  mevi- 
tably  have  led  them  to  belief  in  Christ. 

[He  wrote  of  me.]  These  words  are  very  remarkable.  In 
what  sense  our  Lord  used  them,  we  cannot  exactly  know.  At 
the  very  least  we  may  conclude  He  meant  that  throughout  the 
five  books  of  Mo^es,  by  direct  prophecy,  by  typical  peisons,  by 
typical  ceremonies,  in  many  ways,  and  in  divers  manner-,  Mo.-ehi 
had  written  of  Him,  There  is  probably  a  depth  of  meaning  in 
the  Pentateuch  that  has  never  yet  been  fully  fathomed.  We 
shall  probably  find  at  the  last  day  that  Christ  was  in  many  a 
chapter  and  many  a  verse,  and  yet  we  knew  it  not.  There  is  a 
fulness  in  all  Scripture  far  beyond  our  conception. 

Let  us  note  carefully  that  our  Lord  distinctly  speaks  of  Moses 
as  a  real  person  who,  as  a  matter  of  history,  lived  and  wrote 
books,  and  of  his  writings  as  true  genuine  writings  deserving  of 
all  credit,  and  of  undeniable  authority.  In  the  face  of  such  an 
expression  as  this,  it  is  a  mournful  fact  that  nny  man  called  a 
Christian  can  throw  doubt  on  the  existence  of  Moses,  or  on  the 
authority  of  the  books  attributed  to  him. 

To  say,  as  son  e  have  done,  that  our  Lord  was  only  acconurio* 
14* 


322  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

dating  Himself  to  the  conventional  language  of  the  times,  and 
that  He  did  not  really  mean  to  assert  His  own  belief  either  in  the 
existence  of  Moses,  or  the  autiiority  of  his  writings,  is  to  charge 
Him  with  downright  dishonesty.  It  represents  Him  as  One 
aiding  and  countenancing  the  dissemination  of  a  he  1 

To  say,  as  some  have  done,  that  our  Lord,  born  of  a  Jewish 
woman,  and  brought  up  among  Jews,  was  not  above  the  igno- 
rant prejudices  of  the  Jews,  ai:d  did  not  really  know  that  Moses 
ever  existed,  and  that  his  writings  are  full  of  mistakes,  is  to 
talk  downright  blasphemy  and  nonsense.  Fancy  the  eternal 
Son  of  God  at  any  time  talking  ignorantly  I  Fancy  above  all 
that  any  trace  of  Jewish  ignorance  would  be  likely  to  be  found 
in  this  chapter  of  St.  John's  gospel,  in  which,  above  all  other 
chapters  perhaps,  our  Lord's  divine  knowledge  is  most  strikingly 
brought  out ! 

47  — \If  y&  believe  not  his  writings^  etc.]  This  verse  is  an  extension 
of  the  thought  contained  in  the  preceding  one,  and  a  solemn  and 
mournful  conclusion  of  the  whole  address.  There  is  evidently 
an  intentional  contrast  between  "writings"  and  'Svords,"  as  if 
our  Lord  would  remind  the  Jews  that  "  writings"  are  generally 
more  relied  upon  than  "sayings." — "If  you  do  not  really  believe 
what  your  own  honoured  lawgiver  Moses  wrote, — and  it  is  plain 
that  you  do  not, — it  is  not  likely  that  you  will  believe  what  I 
SAY.  If  you  have  no  real  faith  in  the  things  written  in  your 
Scriptures  by  that  very  Moses,  for  whom  you  profess  such  rever- 
ence, your  favourite  teacher  and  lawgiver,  it  is  not  to  be  wonder- 
ed at  that  you  have  no  faith  in  what  I  say,  and  that  I  speak  to 
you  in  vain." 

The  Greek  word  used  here  for  "writings"  is  very  remarkable. 
It  is  generally  translated  "letters,"  as  Luke  xxiii.  38.  In  2 
Tim.  iii.  15,  it  is  rendered  "  Scriptures."  To  my  mind  it  is  a 
strong  indirect  evidence  in  favour  of  the  verbal  inspiration  of 
Scripture. 

There  is  a  sense  in  which  these  words  should  ring  painfully 
in  the  ears  of  all  the  moiern  assailants  of  the  Mosaic  writings. 
It  is  just  as  true  now,  I  firmly  believe,  as  it  was  eighteen  hundred 
years  ago.  They  cannot  divide  Moses  and  Christ.  If  they  do 
not  believe  the  one,  they  will  find  sooner  or  later  that  they  do 
not  believe  the  other.  If  they  begin  with  casting  oflf  Moses  and 
not  believing  his  writings,  they  will  find  in  the  end  that  to  be 
consistent  they  must  cast  off  Christ.  If  they  will  not  have  the 
Old  Testament,  they  will  discover  at  last  that  they  cannot  have 
the  New,  The  two  are  so  linked  together  that  they  cannot  be 
separated.  "What  God  hath  joined  together  let  no  man  put 
asunder." 

In  concluding  the  notes  on  this  wonderful  chapter,  one  would 


JOHN,    CHAP.    VI. 


823 


like  to  know  how  this  marvellous  address  was  received  by  those 
who  heard  it.  But  here  we  meet  with  one  of  the  peculiar 
"  silences  "  of  Scripture.  Not  one  word  is  written  to  tell  us  what 
the  Jews  of  Jerusalem  thought  of  our  Lord's  argument,  or  what 
effect  it  had  upon  them.  Our  own  duty  is  clear.  Let  us  take 
heed  that  it  has  some  effect  on  ourselves. 

The  amazing  fulness  of  our  Lord's  teaching  appears  most 
strikingly  in  the  address  contained  in  this  chapter.  Within  the 
short  span  of  twenty-nine  verses,  we  find  no  less  than  eleven 
mighty  subjects  brought  forward:  (L)  The  intimate  relation  of 
the  Father  and  the  Son  (2.)  The  divine  commission  and  dignity 
of  the  Son.  (3.)  The  privileges  of  the  man  who  believes.  (4.) 
The  quickening  of  the  spiritually  dead.  (5.)  The  judgment.  (6.) 
The  resurrection  of  the  body.  (7.)  The  value  of  miracles.  (8.) 
The  Scriptures.  (9.)  The  corruption  of  man's  will  the  secret 
of  man's  ruin.  (10.)  The  love  of  man's  praise  the  cause  of 
unbelief.     (11.)  The  importance  of  the  writings  of  Moses. 


JOHN  VL  1—14. 


1  After  these  things  Jesus  went 
ovei'  the  sea  of  G-alilee,  which  is 
the  sea  of  Tiberias. 

2  And  a  great  multitude  fol- 
lowed him  because  they  saw  his 
miracles  which  he  did  on  them  that 
were  diseased. 

3  And  Jesus  went  up  into  a 
mountain,  and  there  he  sat  with  his 
disciples. 

4  And  the  passover,  a  feast  of 
the  Jews,  was  nigh, 

5  When  Jesus  then  lifted  up 
his  eyes  and  saw  a  great  company 
come  unto  him,  he  saith  unto  Philip, 
Whence  shall  we  buy  bread,  that 
these  may  eat  ? 

6  And  this  ho  said  to  prove  him ; 
for  he  himself  knew  what  he  would 
do. 

7  Philip  answered  him,  Two  hun- 
dred pennyworth  of  bread  is  not 
Butficient  for  them,  that  every  one 
of  them  may  take  a  little. 

8  One  of  his  disciples,  Andrew, 
Simon  Peter's  brother,  saith  unto 
him, 

a  There  is  a  lad  here,  which  hath 


five  barley  loaves,  and  two  small 
fishes :  but  what  are  they  among  so 
many  ? 

10  And  Jesus  said,  Make  the 
men  sit  down.  New  there  was 
much  grass  in  the  place.  So  the 
men  sat  down,  in  number  about 
five  thousand. 

11  And  Jesus  took  the  loaves; 
and  when  he  had  given  thanks,  he 
distributed  to  the  disciples,  and  the 
disciples  to  them  that  were  set 
down;  and  likewise  of  the  fishes 
as  much  as  they  would. 

12  When  they  were  filled,  he 
said  unto  his  disciples,  G-ather  up 
the  fragments  that  remain,  that 
nothing  be  lost. 

13  Therefore  they  gathered  them 
together,  and  filled  twelve  baskets 
with  the  fragments  of  the  five 
barley  loaves  which  remained  over 
and  above  unto  them  that  had 
eaten. 

14  Then  those  men  when  they 
had  seen  the  miracle  that  Jesus  did, 
said,  This  is  of  a  truth  that  prophet 
that  should  come  into  the  world. 


324  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

These  verses  describe  one  of  our  Lord's  most  remarkabia 
miracles.  Of  all  the  great  works  that  He  did,  none  was 
done  so  publicly  as  this,  and  before  so  many  witnesses. 
Of  all  the  miracles  related  in  the  Gospels,  this  is  the 
only  one  which  all  the  four  Gospel-writers  alike  record. 
This  fact  alone  (like  the  four  times  repeated  account  of 
the  crucifixion  and  resurrection)  is  enough  to  show  that 
it  is  a  miracle  demanding  special  attention. 

We  have,  for  one  thing,  in  this  miracle,  a  lesson  about 
Chrisfs  almighty  power.  We  see  our  Lord  feeding  five 
thousand  men  with  "five  barley  loaves  and  two  small 
fishes."  We  see  clear  proof  that  a  miraculous  event  took 
place  in  the  "twelve  baskets  of  fragments"  that  remain- 
ed after  all  had  eaten.  Creative  power  was  manifestly 
exercised.  Food  was  called  into  existence  that  did  not 
exist  before.  In  healing  the  sick,  and  raising  the  dead, 
something  was  amended  or  restored  that  had  already 
existed.  In  feeding  five  thousand  men  with  five  loaves, 
something  must  have  been  created  which  before  had  no 
existence. 

Such  a  history  as  this  ought  to  be  specially  instructive 
and  encouraging  to  all  who  endeavour  to  do  good  to 
souls.  It  shows  us  the  Lord  Jesus  "  able  to  save  to  the 
uttermost."  He  is  One  who  has  all  power  over  dead  hearts, 
Kot  only  can  He  mend  that  which  is  broken, — build  up 
that  which  is  ruined, — heal  that  which  is  sick, — strengthen 
that  which  is  weak.  He  can  do  even  greater  things  than 
these.  He  can  call  into  being  that  which  was  not  before, 
and  call  it  out  of  nothing.  We  must  never  despair  of  any 
one  being  sayed.  So  long  as  there  is  life  there  is  hope. 
Beason  and  sense  may  say  that  some  poor  sinner  is  too 
hardened,  or  too  old  to  be  converted.  Faith  will  reply, — 
*'  Our  Master  can  create  as  well  as  renew.  With  a  Saviour 
who,  by  His  Spirit,  can  create  a  new  hearty  nothing  is  i^a- 
possible." 


JOHN,    CHAP.   VI.  325 

We  have,  for  another  thing,  in  this  miracle,  a  lesson 
about  the  office  of  ■mi?iisters.  We  see  the  apostles  receiving 
the  bread  from  our  Lord's  hands,  after  He  had  blessed  it, 
and  distributing  it  to  the  multitude.  It  was  not  their 
hands  that  made  it  increase  and  multiply,  but  their  Mas- 
ter's. It  was  His  almighty  power  that  provided  an  unfailing 
supply.  It  was  their  work  to  receive  humbly,  and  dis 
tribute  faithfully. 

Now  here  is  a  lively  emblem  of  the  work  which  a  true 
minister  of  the  New  Testament  is  meant  to  do.  He  is  not 
a  mediator  between  God  and  man.  He  has  no  power  to 
put  away  sin,  or  impart  grace.  His  whole  business  is  to 
receive  the  br-ead  of  life  Avhich  his  Master  provides,  and  t« 
distribute  it  among  the  souls  among  whom  he  labours.  He 
cannot  make  men  value  the  bread,  or  receive  it.  He  can- 
not make  it  soul-saving,  or  life-giving,  to  any  one.  This  is 
not  his  work.  For  this  he  is  not  responsible.  His  whole 
business  is  to  be  a  faithful  distributor  of  the  food  which 
his  Divine  Master  has  provided  ;  and  that  done,  his  office 
is  discharged. 

We  have,  lastly,  in  this  miracle,  a  lesson  about  the  suffi- 
ciency of  the  Gospel  for  the  wants  of  all  mankind.  We 
see  the  Lord  Jesus  supplying  the  hunger  of  a  huge  multi- 
tude of  five  thousand  men.  The  provision  seemed,  at  first 
sight,  utterly  inadequate  for  the  occasion.  To  satisfy  so 
many  craving  mouths  with  such  scanty  fare,  in  such  a 
wilderness,  seemed  impossible.  But  the  event  showed  that 
there  was  enough  and  to  spare.  There  was  not  one  who 
could  complain  that  he  was  not  filled. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  this  was  meant  to  teach  the 
adequacy  of  Christ's  Gospel  to  supply  the  necessities  of  the 
wliole  world.  Weak,  and  feeble,  and  foolish  as  it  may  seem 
to  man,  the  simple  story  of  the  Cross  is  enough  for  all  the 
children  of  Adam  in  every  part  of  the  globe.  The  tidings 
of  Christ's  death  for  sinners,  and  the  atonement  made  by 


326  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

that  death,  is  able  to  meet  the  hearts  and  satisfy  the  con- 
sciences of  all  nations,  and  peoples,  and  kindreds,  and 
tongues.  Carried  by  faithful  messengers,  it  feeds  and  sup- 
plies all  ranks  and  classes.  "  The  preaching  of  tlie  cross  is 
to  them  that  perish  foolishness,  but  to  us  who  are  saved  it 
is  the  power  of  God."  (1  Cor.  i.  18.)  Five  barley  loaves 
and  two  small  fishes  seemed  scanty  provision  for  a  hungry 
crowd.  But  blessed  by  Christ,  and  distributed  by  His 
disciples,  they  were  more  than  sufficient. 

Let  us  never  doubt  for  a  moment,  that  the  preaching  of 
Christ  crucified, — the  old  story  of  His  blood,  and  right- 
eousness, and  substitution, — is  enough  for  all  the  spiritual 
necessities  of  all  mankind.  It  is  not  worn  out.  It  is  not 
obsolete.  It  has  not  lost  its  power.  We  want  nothing  new, — 
nothing  more  broad  and  kind, — nothing  more  intellectual, — 
nothing  more  efficacious.  We  want  nothing  but  the  true 
bread  of  life  which  Christ  bestows,  distributed  faithfully 
among  starving  souls.  Let  men  sneer  or  ridicule  as  they 
will,  Nothing  else  can  do  good  in  this  sinful  world.  No 
other  teaching  can  fill  hungry  consciences,  and  give  them 
peace.  We  are  all  in  a  wilderness.  We  must  feed  on  Christ 
crucified,  and  the  atonement  made  by  His  death,  or  we  shall 
die  in  our  sins. 

Notes.     John  YI.  1 — 14. 

1. — {After  these  things.']     The  remark  made  in  chapter  v.,  1st  verse, 

applies  here.  The  expression  denotes  an  interval  of  time  having 
elapsed  between  the  end  of  the  fifth  chapter  and  the  beginning 
of  the  sixth.  John  pa?ses  over  all  the  events  which  happened  at 
the  conclusion  of  our  Lord's  defence  of  Himself  at  Jerusalem. 
In  fact,  if  the  feast  spoken  of  at  the  beginning  of  the  fifth 
chapter  was  really  the  passover,  almost  an  entire  year  of  our 
Lord's  ministry  is  unnoticed  by  John. 

The  events  in  this  chapter,  we  should  remark,  are  the  only  events 
in  our  Lord's  ministry  in  G-aliTee  described  by  St,  John,  except- 
ing the  miracle  of  turning  the  water  into  wine  at  Cana,  and  the 
heaUng  of  the  ruler's  son.  (Chapter  ii.  and  iv.) 

[Went  over  the  sea  of   Galilee.... Tiherias.]     This   sea   so-called 


327 

was  a  fresh- water  lake  in  Galilee,  througli  which  the  Jordan  runs. 

According  to  Thomson,  one  of  the  most  recent  and  accurate 
travellers  in  the  Holy  Land,  it  is  about  fourteen  miles  long,  and 
nine  wide,  at  the  widest  part.  It  lies  no  less  than  six  hundred 
feet  below  the  level  of  the  sea,  and  is  often  agitated  by  sudden 
and  violent  storms. 

Tiberias  was  a  town  on  the  west  side  of  the  lake,  built  by 
Herod  about  the  time  of  our  Lord's  birth,  and  comparatively  a 
modern  place  in  our  Lord's  time.  In  the  days  of  Josephus, 
forty  years  after  our  Lord's  crucifixion,  Tiberias  had  become  an 
important  city.  It  was  spared  by  the  Romans,  when  Vespasian's 
army  destroyed  almost  every  other  city  in  Galilee,  for  its  adherence 
to  the  Roman  cause,  and  was  made  capital  of  the  province. 

John  is  the  only  Gospel-writer  who  calls  the  lake  the  "  sea  of 
Tiberias."  His  doing  so  is  an  incidental  confirmation  of  the 
opinion  that  he  wrote  much  later  than  Matthew,  Mark,  and 
Luke,  and  after  the  taking  of  Jerusalem.  He  naturally  used 
the  name  by  which  the  lake  was  best  known  when  he  wrote, 
and  most  familiar  to  the  Gentile  readers  whom  he  had  especially 
in  view. 

The  reason  of  our  Lord  going  over  the  sea  would  appear  to  be 
His  desire  to  withdraw  Himself  from  public  notice  (Mark  vi.  31), 
and  perhaps  from  the  persecution  of  Herod's  party,  after  the  death 
of  John  the  Baptist.  Comparing  John's  account  with  that  of 
Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke,  it  seems  most  hkely  that  he  "  went 
over  the  sea  "  from  the  west  coast,  and  landed  on  the  north-east 
side  of  the  lake,  not  far  from  Bethsaida.  Luke  tells  us  distinctly 
that  the  miracle  which  John  here  records,  was  wrought  in  "  a 
desert  place,  belonging  to  the  city,  called  Bethsaida."  (Luke  ix. 
10.)  Add  to  this  the  fact  that  no  less  than  three  of  our  Lord's 
disciples  were  inhabitants  of  Bethsaida,  viz.,  Philip,  Andrew,  and 
Peter,  and  our  Lord's  retirement  to  this  neighbourhood  seems 
natural  and  reasonable. — The  notion  held  by  many  that  there 
were  two  Bethsaidas,  one  in  Galilee,  where  Andrew,  Peter,  and 
Philip  lived,  and  one  in  Gaulanitis,  where  this  miracle  of  feeding 
the  multitude  was  wrought,  seems  both  groundless  and  needless. 
Bethsaida  was  at  the  head  of  the  lake,  in  GaUIee,  near  the  point 
where  the  river  Jordan  entered  the  lake,  and  the  district  belong- 
ing to  it  extended  most  probably  beyond  the  river  into  Gaulanitis. 
Thomson  shows  this  satisfactorily. 

— [A  great  multitude  followed.. ..diseased.]  There  seems  no  reason 
to  suppose  that  this  multitude  followed  our  Lord  for  any  but  low 
motives.  They  "saw  His  miracles:"  that  was  all.  Some  few, 
perhaps,  were  in  doubt  and  suspense,  wondering  whether  He 
who  wrought  such  miracles  could  possibly  be  the  Messiah.  The 
great  majority  probably  "  followed  "  from  that  vague,  idle  curiosity 


328  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

and  love  of  excitement,  which  are  the  principles  that  gather  nearly 
every  crowd  in  the  world. 

St.  Mark  says  that  "  the  people  saw  them  departing,  and  many 
knew  him :  and  ran  afoot  thither  out  of  all  cities,  and  outwent 
them,  and  came  together  unto  him."  (Mark  vi.  33.)  This  they 
might  easily  do  by  going  round  the  head  of  the  lake,  to  the 
point  where  Bethsaida  was. 

3. — [Jesus  went  up  into  a  mountain.']  The  Greek  here  would  be 
more  correctly  rendered  "  into  the  mountain."  Whether  there  is 
any  special  reason  for  this  we  cannot  tell. — It  may  be  the  one 
mountain  which  stood  there,  in  contradistinction  to  the  more  level 
ground  composing  the  district.  Thomson,  the  American  traveller, 
expressly  says  that  there  is  a  "bold  headland"  here,  with  "a 
smooth  grassy  spot "  at  the  base,  "  capable  of  seating  many 
thousand  people." — It  may  possibly  be  "  that  particular  hill "  to 
which  our  Lord  was  in  the  habit  of  going  when  He  visited  the 
district  near  Bethsaida. — It  may  be  the  "  hill  country  "  generally, 
or  mountainous  district  near  Bethsaida. 

[His  disciples.]  This  expression  includes  not  only  the  twelve 
who  had  been  chosen  and  set  apart  by  our  Lord  by  this  time,  but 
many  others  who  professed  themselves  His  disciples.  Many  of 
them,  it  would  appear  from  this  very  chapter  (verse  66),  were 
not  really  believers,  and  in  course  of  time  fell  away.  If  Christ 
Himself  had  many  such  disciples  and  followers,  ministers  now- 
a-days  (even  the  very  best)  must  not  be  surprised  to  find  the 
same  state  of  things  among  their  people. 

L'—[The  passover,  a  feast  of  the  Jews,  was  nigh.]  John's  habit  of 
explainmg  Jewish  customs  for  the  benefit  of  Gentile  readers, 
should  here  be  noticed. 

The  approach  of  the  passover  feast  is  no  doubt  specially  men- 
tioned in  order  to  show  the  suitableness  of  our  Lord's  discourse 
in  this  chapter  to  the  season  of  the  year.  The  minds  of  His 
haarers  would  doubtless  be  thinking  of  the  passover  lamb,  and 
its  flesh  about  to  be  eaten  and  blood  about  to  be  sprinkled.  Our 
Lord  takes  occasion  to  speak  of  that  "flesh  and  blood"  which 
must  be  eaten  and  drunk  by  all  who  would  not  perish  in  sin.  It 
is  an  instance  of  that  divine  wisdom  with  which  our  Master  spoke 
"  words  in  season,"  and  turned  everything  to  account. 

Let  it  be  noted  that  our  Lord  did  not  keep  this  passover  in 
Jerusalem  to  all  appearance,  but  remained  in  Galilee.  Yet  He 
generally  observed  all  the  ordinances  of  the  law  of  Moses  most 
strictly,  and  "fulfilled  all  righteousness."  The  reason  evidently 
is,  as  llollock  remarks,  that  the  enmity  and  persecution  of  the 
leading  Jews  at  Jerusalem  made  it  impossible  for  Him  to  go  there. 
It  would  have  cut  short  His  ministry  and  brought  on  His  death 


329 

befcre  the  time.  May  we  not  also  learn  here  that  the  use  of 
outward  orlinances  and  ceremonies  is  not  so  absolutely  neces- 
sary that  they  can  never  be  dispensed  with  ?  Grace,  and  repen- 
tance, and  faith  are  absolutely  needful  to  salvation.  Sacraments 
and  ordinances  are  not. 

The  near  approach  of  the  passover  may  possibly  account  in 
part  for  the  crowds  who  were  assembled  on  this  occasion.  Not 
a  few  of  the  people  perhaps  were  on  their  way  to  Jerusalem,  to 
keep  the  passover  feast,  and  were  drawn  out  of  their  road  by 
hearing  of  our  Lord's  miracles. 

5.  — [  TT'^en  Jesus  then  lifted  up  His  eyes  and  saw  a  great  company!] 
"We  must  not  conclude  from  these  expressions,  that  our  Lord  was 
suddenly  surprised  by  the  appearance  of  a  great  crowd.  On  the 
contrary,  Matthew  and  Mark  both  tell  us  that  before  He  wrought 
the  miracle  which  we  are  about  to  read  of,  He  had  felt  com- 
passion for  the  multitude,  because  they  were  "  as  sheep  not  having 
a  shepherd,"  and  had  "  taught  them  m-any  things."  (Mark  vi.  34.) 
— When  this  teaching  was  over,  He  seems  to  have  taken  a  survey 
of  the  crowd  before  Him,  and  seeing  how  large  it  was,  proceeded 
to  show  His  tender  concern  for  the  wants  of  men's  bodies  as  well 
as  of  their  souls.  A  great  crowd  is  always  an  impressive  and 
solemn  sight.  It  is  an  interesting  thought  that  the  same  eyes 
which  looked  compassionately  on  the  crowd  here,  are  still  look- 
ing at  every  crowd,  and  especially  at  every  crowd  of  persons 
assembled  in  Grod's  name. 

\He  saWi  unto  Philip,  whence.... huy.... eat]  Our  Lord's  reason 
for  asking  this  question  is  given  in  the  next  verse.  But  it  is 
worth  notice  that  there  was  a  certain  propriety  in  asking  Phihp 
this  question,  because  Philip  "was  of  Bethsaida,"  the  very  town 
near  which  they  were  all  assembled.  (John  i.  44.)  Our  Lord 
tl  \erefore  might  reasonably  appeal  to  Philip,  as  one  most  likely 
and  able  to  answer  His  question,  whether  it  were  possible  to 
buy  bread  for  such  a  multitude.  He  would  of  course  know  the 
capabilities  of  the  neighbourhood.  The  idea,  maintained  by 
Chrysostom,  Burgon,  and  others,  that  Philip  was  a  disciple  pecu- 
liarly slow  to  recognize  Christ's  Godhead,  and  therefore  requiring 
special  appeals,  seems  to  me  a  far  less  satisfactory  solution. 

G. — [77iis  He  said  to  prove  him.]  "We  find  the  s3me  kind  of  pro- 
cedure on  other  occasions.  When  our  Lord  appeared  to  the 
two  disciples  at  Emmaus,  we  read  that  after  His  discourse  "with 
them,  "He  made  as  though  He  would  have  gone  further." 
(Luke  xxi.  28.)  This  was  "  to  prove"  whether  they  really  wished 
for  more  of  His  company. — When  on  another  occasion  He  came 
to  the  disciples  walking  on  the  sea,  St.  Mark  says,  "  He  would 
have  passed  by  them."  (Mark  vi.  48.)  When  in  this  very 
chapter  He  would  draw  forth  an  expression  of  faith  from  His  dii- 


830  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

cifles,  He  says,  "Will  ye  also  go  away?"  (John  vi.  67.)  Our 
Lord  kuows  the  sluggishness  and  coldness  of  our  hearts,  and  He 
sees  it  good  to  stir  our  spiritual  senses,  and  draw  forth  our 
spiritual  desires  by  such  a  mode  of  dealing  with  us. 

Explanatory  observations  like  this,  made  by  the  Gospel-writer 
himself,  are  more  frequent  in  St.  John's  Gospel  than  in  any  of  the 
other  three. 

[He  himself  knew... would  do.]  This  would  be  rendered  more 
hterally  "  what  He  was  about  to  do."  Our  Lord's  foreknowledge 
of  the  miracle  He  was  about  to  do  should  be  noted.  The  words 
He  used  in  the  last  chapter  should  be  remembered.  They  were 
not  works  which  were  done  by  chance  and  accidentally,  in  conse- 
quence of  unforeseen  circumstances,  but-  foreseen  and  pre- 
determined. They  were  "the  works  which  the  Father  had 
given  him  to  finish."  (John  v.  36.) 

7. — [Philip  answered  Him,  Two  hundred  penny  worth,  etc.]  What 
quantity  of  bread  this  sum  would  have  procured  we  have  no 
accurate  means  of  knowing.  But  we  may  remember  that  the 
Roman  "  denarius,"  or  penny,  represented  a  very  much  larger 
sum  than  a  penny  does  among  ourselves.  We  must  remember 
also  that  bread  was  much  cheaper  then  than  it  is  now.  The 
quantity  Philip  named  was  probably  much  larger  than  we  sup- 
pose. 

Burgon  thinks  that  the  sum  named  by  Philip  was  the  whole 
"  store  of  money  contained  in  their  common  purse," — viz.,  about 
six  or  seven  pounds.     But  this  cannot  be  proved. 

8. — [One  of  Ms  disciples,  Andrew,  etc.]  Let  it  be  noted  here  that 
Andrew,  as  well  as  Philip,  was  a  native  of  the  district  of  Beth- 
saida,  where  all  these  things  happened.  There  is  a  propriety 
therefore  in  his  speaking  and  giving  information  on  the  present 
occasion. 

9. — [There  is  a  lad...five  barley  loaves  and  two  small  fishes.]  We 
should  note  in  this  verse  how  small  were  the  provisions  which 
our  Lord  miraculously  multiplied.  The  fact  that  one  "  httle 
boy"  (for  this  is  the  meaning  of  the  word  we  render  "lad") 
could  carry  all  the  supply  that  Andrew  mentions,  is  a  plain  proof 
that  the  "  loaves  "  could  not  have  been  large,  nor  the  "  fish  "  of 
great  size. 

The  "  fishes  "  were  probably  small  dried  fish,  such  as  are  not 
uncommonly  used  as  food  now  in  hot  countries,  and  near  the 
sea  of  Galilee  would  be  of  course  common. 

Bailey  was  regarded,  according  to  the  Talmud,  as  a  coarse 
food,  only  fit  for  horses  and  asses. 

[  What  are  they  among  so  many.]   This  expression  of  Andrew's 


JOHN,   CHAP.   VI.  831 

is  purposely  reported,  no  doubt,  in.  order  to  show  how  strong 
was  the  conviction  of  our  Lord's  disciples  that  they  had  not  suf- 
ficient provision  to  feed  the  multitude,  and  then  to  bring  out 
into  clearer  light  the  greatness  of  the  miracie  which  our  Lord 
wrought.  It  also  helps  to  prove  that  the  wonderful  feehng  of 
the  multitude  was  not  a  preconcerted  and  prepared  thing,  ar- 
ranged by  our  Lord  and  His  disciples.  Even  His  own  immedi- 
ate followers  were  taken  by  surprise. 

10. — [Jesus  said,  make  the  men  sit  down.]  This  arrangement  pre- 
vented confusion  and  preserved  order,  points  of  vast  importance 
when  any  large  assembly  of  people  is  gathered  together.  More- 
over, it  made  it  less  easy  to  practise  any  imposition  or  deceit  in 
the  feeding  of  the  multitude.  When  every  man  was  sitting 
steadily  in  his  appointed  place,  no  one  could  be  passed  over  in 
the  distribution  of  food,  without  it  being  observed.  St.  Mark 
tells  us  that  they  "sat  down  in  ranks,  by  hundreds  and  by  fif- 
ties." (Mark  vi.  40.) 

[There  was  much  grass  in  the  place.]  The  time  of  the  year 
when  these  things  happened  would  be  the  very  time  when  there 
was  most  "  grass."  It  was  in  the  spring-time,  just  before  the 
passover,  when  the  winter  was  gone,  and  the  parching  heat  of 
summer  had  not  begun,  Thomson,  the  American  traveller,  re- 
ports that  at  this  very  day  there  is  an  open  space  of  green  gras3 
at  the  foot  of  a  hill,  at  the  very  place  where  in  all  probabihty 
this  miracle  took  place. 

Let  us  note  our  Lord's  consideration  for  the  bodily  comfort  of 
His  followers.  He  chooses  a  place  where  there  was  "  much  grass" 
to  sit  down  on. 

[So  the  men  sat  down.. .Jive  thousand.]  The  word  "  men  "  here 
is  probably  emphatic,  in  contradistinction  to  the  "women  and 
children,"  whom  Matthew  expressly  mentions  as  having  been 
present  beside  the  five  thousand  men.  In  the  Greek  the  word 
is  not  the  same  as  that  rendered  "men"  in  the  first  clause  of 
this  verse. 

II. — [Jesus  took  the  loave8...given  thanks.]  The  expression  here 
seems  rather  to  imply  a  solemn  action  of  prayer  and  blessing,  as 
well  as  of  giving  thanks,  as  the  first  preliminary  to  the  mighty 
miracle  about  to  follow.  In  fact  St.  Luke  says,  "  He  took  the 
five  loaves  and  the  two  fishes,  and  looking  up  to  heaven  He 
blessed  them,  and  brake,  and  gave,"  etc.  (Luke  ix.  IQ.)  This 
also  seems  implied  in  St.  John's  subsequent  reference  to  this 
miracle,  where  He  speaks  of  "  the  place  where  they  did  eat 
bread  after  that  the  Lord  had  given  thanks."  (John  vi.23.)  The 
Greek  word  here  used  is  precisely  the  same  that  is  used  in  the 
account  of  the  institution  of  the  Lord's  Supper  given  by  St. 
Matthew  St.  Mark,  St.  Luke,  and  St.  Paul.     St.  Matthew  and 


832  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

St.  Mark  say  that  our  Lord  "  gave  thanks  "  when  He  took  "  the 
cup."  St.  Luke  and  St.  Paul  say  that  He  also  did  it  when  He 
took  "the  bread."  So  here  we  can  hardly  doubt  that  blessing 
and  giving  thanks  went  together.  The  Greek  word  is  the  ono 
which  we  have  borrowed  and  transferred  to  our  own  language 
in  the  expression  "  Eucharist." 

[He  distributed  to  the  disciples^  etc.]  I  think  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  this  was  the  point  at  which  the  mighty  miracle  her© 
wrought  by  our  Lord  came  in.  As  fast  as  He  broke  the  loaves 
and  the  disciples  carried  them  away  to  distribute  them,  so  fast 
did  the  loaves  multiply  under  His  hands.  It  was  in  the  act  of 
breaking  and  distributing  to  the  disciples  that  the  miraculous 
multiplication  took  place.  In  fact  there  was  a  continual  act  of 
creation  going  on.  Bread  was  continually  called  into  existence 
which  did  not  exist  before.  The  greatness  of  this  miracle  is  per- 
haps not  sufficiently  realized.  One  loaf  and  less  than  half  a  fish 
to  every  thousand  men  !  It  is  evident  there  could  not  have  been 
more  than  a  small  morsel  for  each  one  without  a  miraculous  in- 
crease of  the  food. 

Bishop  Hall  remarks,  "  He  could  as  well  have  multiplied  the 

loaves  whole ;  why  would  He  rather  do  it  in  the   breaking  ? 

Was  it  not  to  teach  us  that  in  the  distribution  of  our  goods  we 

^should  expect  His  blessing,  not  in  their  entireness  and  reserva- 

*  tion  ?     There  is  that  scattereth  and  yet  increaseth." 

12. — [When  they  were  filled.]  That  expression  deserves  notice.  It 
is  one  of  the  strongest  proofs  of  the  reality  of  the  miracle  we  are 
reading.  It  would  be  impossible  to  convince  five  thousand  hun- 
gry men  in  a  wilderness  that  they  were  really  filled,  if  they  were 
not.  A  few  enthusiasts  and  fanatics  might  possibly  have  been 
found  who  might  have  fancied  they  had  eaten  when  they  had 
not.  But  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  so  strong  a  bodily  sensa- 
tion as  hunger  could  possibly  be  relieved  in  five  thousand  men, 
if  there  had  not  been  a  real  supply  of  food,  and  real  eating  of  it. 

[He  said  unto  his  disciples,  Gather  up  the  fragments,  etc.]  In 
this  little  circumstance  again  we  have  a  proof  that  real  food  waa 
supphed,  and  in  sufficient  quantity  for  all.  There  was  not  merely 
a  morsel  for  each  man,  but  an  abundant  supply,  enough  and  to 
spare.  Our  Lord's  care  for  little  things,  and  dislike  of  waste  and 
extravagance,  appear  strongly  in  this  sentence.  It  would  be  well 
if  the  principle  contained  in  the  words  was  more  remembered  by 
Christians, — ^'Let  nothing  be  lost."  It  is  a  deep  principle  of 
v^ry  wide  application.  Time,  money,  and  opportunities  of  show- 
ing kindness  and  doing  good  are  specially  to  be  remembered  in 
applying  the  principle. 

It  admits  of  question  whether  the  "  disciples"  who  distributed 


833 

the  breaii  on  this  occasion,  and  afterwards  gathered  the  frag- 
ment?, did  not  include  other  helpers  beside  the  twelve  apostles. 
The  time  necessary  for  the  distribution  of  bread  among  five  thou- 
sand people,  if  only  twelve  pairs  of  hands  were  employed,  would 
prove  on  calculation  to  be  very  great. 

13. — {TJierefore  they  gathered....filled  twelve  baskets^  etc.]  This  simple 
fa  jt  is  enough  to  prove  that  a  mighty  miracle  had  been  wrought. 
Our  common  sense  can  tell  us  that  five  loaves  and  two  fishes 
alone  could  not  have  filled  a  single  basket.  Now  if  the  frag- 
ments left  after  the  meal  were  enough  to  fill  "twelve  baskets," 
there  must  evidently  have  been  a  miraculous  multiplication  of 
the  food  at  some  stage  of  the  proceedings.  The  fragments  alone 
were  probably  fifty  times  more  bulky  than  the  original  supply  of 
food  with  which  the  meal  began.  The  identity  between  the 
number  of  the  baskets  filled,  and  the  number  of  the  apostles,  will 
of  course  strike  any  reader.  One  might  think  that  each  apostle 
had  a  basket. 

St.  Mark  mentions  that  there  were  fragments  of  "nshes  "  put 
into  the  baskets  as  well  as  loaves,  so  that  the  fishes  also  were 
miraculously  multiplied  as  well  as  the  bread. 

Some  early  writers,  not  without  justice,  call  this  the  greatest 
miracle  that  our  Lord  ever  wrought.  Perhaps  we  are  poor 
judges  of  such  points,  and  little  able  to  make  comparisons.  But 
it  is  certain  that  on  no  other  occasion  did  our  Lord  manifest  so 
clearly  His  creative  power.  No  doubt  it  was  as  easy  to  Him  to 
cause  bread  to  be,  as  to  say  "  let  there  be  light,"  or  to  make  the 
earth  bring  forth  herbs  and  corn  at  the  creation  of  the  world. 
But  the  miracle  was  clearly  intended  to  be  one  which  Christians 
should  hold  in  special  remembrance.  It  is  at  any  rate  note- 
worthy that  this  is  the  only  passage  in  Christ's  hfe  which  all  the 
four  Gospel-writers  aUke  record.  In  this  respect  the  miracle 
stands  alone. 

The  attempts  of  Neologians  to  explain  away  this  miracle  are 
simply  contemptible  and  ridiculous.  It  requires  more  faith  to 
believe  their  explanations  than  to  believe  the  miracle  and  take  it 
as  we  find  it.  None  but  a  person  determined  to  disbelieve  all 
miracles,  and  cast  them  out  of  the  Sacred  narrative,  would  ever 
try  to  make  out  (as  some  actually  have  tried)  that  the  four  times 
repeated  story  of  the  miraculous  feeding  which  we  have  consi- 
dered, only  meant  that  the  multitude  brought  out  the  hidden 
stores,  of  provisions  which  they  had  carried  with  them,  and 
shared  them  with  one  another  I 

14. — [^Then  those  men.]  This  probably  means  the  whole  crowd  and 
multitude  which  had  been  fed  on  this  occasion. 

*  When  they  had  seen  the  miracle.]     Signs  and  wonders  were  ex^ 


834  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

pected  to  accompany  the  appearance  of  any  prophet  or  messen- 
ger from  God.  Here  was  a  mighty  miracle,  and  at  once  tha 
minds  of  all  who  saw  it  were  excited. 

\This  is  of  a  truth  that  prophet,  etc.]  This  meant  that  "  pro- 
phet like  unto  Moses,"  whom  all  welj-instructed  Jews  expected 
to  appear,  and  for  whose  speedy  appearing  the  ministry  of  John 
the  Baptist  had  prepared  the  minds  of  all  the  dwellers  in  Pales- 
tine. 

"  Of  a  truth  "  would  be  more  Hterally  rendered  "  truly," — ».  e., 
really  and  indeed. 

''That  prophet"  would  be  more  literally  "the  prophet." 


JOHN  YI.  15—21. 


15  When  Jesus  therefore  per- 
ceived that  they  would  come  and 
take  him  by  force,  to  make  him  a 
king,  he  departed  again  into  a  moun- 
tain himself  alone. 

16  And  when  even  was  now 
come,  his  disciples  went  down  unto 
the  sea, 

17  And  entered  into  a  ship, 
and  went  over  the  sea  toward 
Capernaum.  And  it  was  now 
dark,  and  Jesus  was  not  come  to 
them. 


18  And  the  sea  arose  by  reason 
of  a  great  wind  that  blew. 

19  So  when  they  had  rowed 
about  five  and  twenty  or  thirty  fur- 
longs, they  see  Jesus  walking  on 
the  sea,  and  drawing  nigh  unto  the 
ship ;  and  they  were  afraid. 

20  But  he  saith  unto  them.  It  is 
I ;  be  not  afraid. 

21  Then  they  willingly  received 
him  into  the  ship :  and  immediately 
the  ship  was  at  the  land  whither 
they  went. 


We  should  notice,  in  these  verses,  our  Lord  Jesus  ChrlsPs 
humility.  We  are  told  that,  after  feeding  the  multitude, 
He  "perceived  that  they  would  come  and  take  him  by 
force  to  make  him  a  king."  At  once  He  departed,  and 
left  them.  He  wanted  no  such  honours  as  these.  He 
had  come,  "  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister 
and  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many."  (Matt.  xx.  28.) 

We  see  the  same  spirit  and  frame  of  mind  all  througli 
our  Lord's  earthly  ministry.  From  His  cradle  to  His  grave 
He  was  "  clothed  with  humility."  (1  Pet.  v.  5.)  He  was 
born  of  a  poor  woman,  and  spent  the  first  thirty  years 
of  His  life  in  a  carpenter's  house  at  Nazareth.    He  was 


335 

followed  by  poor  companions, — many  of  them  no  belter 
than  fishermen.  He  was  poor  in  his  manner  of  living : 
"The  foxes  had  holes,  and  the  birds  of  the  air  their  nests: 
but  the  Son  of  man  had  not  where  to  lay  his  head.'* 
(Matt.  viii.  20.)  When  He  went  on  the  Sea  of  Galilee, 
it  was  in  a  borrowed  boat.  When  He  rode  into  Jerusalem, 
it  was  on  a  borrowed  ass.  When  He  was  buried,  it  was 
in  a  borrowed  tomb.  "  Though  he  was  rich,  yet  for  our 
sakes  he  became  poor."  (2  Cor.  viii.  9.) 

The  example  is  one  which  ought  to  be  far  more 
remembered  than  it  is.  How  common  are  pride,  and 
ambition,  and  high-mindedness !  How  rare  are  humility 
and  lowly-mindedness !  How  few  ever  refuse  greatness 
when  offered  to  them !  How  many  are  continually 
seeking  great  things  for  themselves,  and  forgetting  the 
injunction, — "  Seek  them  not !  "  (Jer.  xlv.  5.)  Surely 
it  was  not  for  nothing  that  our  Lord,  after  washing  the 
disciples'  feet,  said, — "  I  have  given  you  an  example  that 
ye  should  do  as  I  have  done."  (John  xiii.  15.)  There  is 
little,  it  may  be  feared,  of  that  feet-washing  spirit  among 
Christians.  But  whether  men  will  hear  or  forbear,  humi- 
lity is  the  queen  of  the  graces.  "  Tell  me,"  it  has  been 
said,  "  how  much  humility  a  man  has,  and  I  will  tell  you 
how  much  religion  he  has."  Humility  is  the  first  step 
toward  heaven,  and  the  true  way  to  honour.  "  He  that 
humbleth  himself  shall  be  exalted."  (Luke  xviii.  14.) 

We  should  notice,  secondly,  in  these  verses,  the  trials 
through  which  Chrisfs  disciples  had  to  pass.  We  are 
told  that  they  were  sent  over  the  lake  by  themselves,  while 
their  Master  tarried  behind.  And  then  we  see  them  alone 
in  a  dark  night,  tossed  about  by  a  great  wind  on  stormy 
waters,  and,  worst  of  all,  Christ  not  with  them.  It 
was  a  strange  transition.  From  witnessing  a  mighty 
miracle,  and  helping  it  instrumentally,  amidst  an  admir- 
ing crowd,  to    solitude,    darkness,  winds,  waves,    storm, 


836  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

anxiety,  and  danger,  the  change  was  very  great !  But 
Christ  knew  it,  and  Christ  appointed  it,  and  it  was 
working  for  their  good. 

Trial,  we  must  distinctly  understand,  is  part  of  the  diet 
which  all  true  Christians  must  expect.  It  is  one  of  the 
means  by  which  their  grace  is  proved,  and  by  which  they 
find  out  what  there  is  in  themselves.  Winter  as  well  as 
summer, — cold  as  well  as  heat, — clouds  as  well  as  sun- 
shine,— are  all  necessary  to  bring  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit  to 
ripeness  and  maturity.  We  do  not  naturally  like  this. 
We  would  rather  cross  the  lake  with  calm  weather  and 
favourable  winds,  with  Christ  always  by  our  side,  and  the 
sun  shining  down  on  our  faces.  But  it  may  not  be.  It  i? 
not  in  this  way  that  God's  children  are  made  "partakers 
of  His  holiness."  (Heb.  xii.  10.)  Abraham,  and  Jacob, 
and  Moses,  and  David,  and  Job  were  all  men  of  many 
trials.  Let  us  be  content  to  walk  in  their  footsteps,  and 
to  drink  of  their  cup.  In  our  darkest  hours  we  may  seem 
to  be  left, — but  we  are  never  really  alone. 

Let  us  notice,  in  the  last  place,  our  Lord  Jesus  Chrisfa 
power  over  the  waves  of  the  sea.  He  came  to  His  disciples  as 
they  were  rowing  on  the  stormy  lake,  "  walking  on  "  the 
waters.  He  walked  on  them  as  easily  as  we  walk  on  dry 
land.  They  bore  Him  as  firmly  as  the  pavement  of  the 
Temple,  or  the  hills  around  Nazareth.  That  which  is 
contrary  to  all  natural  reason  was  perfectly  possible  to 
Christ. 

The  Lord  Jesus,  we  must  remember,  is  not  only  the 
Lord,  but  the  Maker  of  all  creation.  "All  things  were 
made  by  him;  and  without  him  was  not  anything  made 
that  was  made."  (John  i.  3.)  It  was  just  as  easy  for  Him 
to  walk  on  the  sea  as  to  form  the  sea  at  the  beginning, — 
just  as  easy  to  suspend  the  common  laws  of  nature,  as  they 
are  called,  as  to  injpose  those  laws  at  the  first.  Learned 
men  talk  solemn   nonsense   sometimes  about   the  eternal 


JOHN,    CHAP.   VI.  337 

fixity  of  the  "  laws  of  nature,"  as  if  they  were  above  God 
Himself,  and  could  never  be  suspended.  It  is  well  to  be 
reminded  sometimes  by  such  miracles  as  that  before  us, 
that  these  so-called  "  laws  of  nature  "  are  neither  immu- 
table nor  eternal.  They  had  a  beginning,  and  will  one 
day  have  an  end. 

Let  all  true  Christians  take  comfort  in  the  thought  that 
their  Saviour  is  Lord  of  waves  and  winds,  of  storms  and 
tempests,  and  can  come  to  them  in  the  darkest  hour, 
*'  walking  upon  the  sea."  There  are  waves  of  trouble  far 
heavier  than  any  on  the  Lake  of  Galilee.  There  are  days 
of  darkness  which  try  the  faith  of  the  holiest  Christian. 
But  let  us  never  despair  if  Christ  is  our  Friend.  He  can 
come  to  our  aid  in  an  hour  when  we  think  not,  and  m 
ways  that  we  did  not  expect.  And  when  He  comes,  all 
will  be  calm. 

Notes.    John  VI.  15—21. 

15. — [  When  Jesus  therefore  perceived.]  This  would  be  more  lite- 
rally rendered,  "  Jesus  knowing-,  or  having  known."  It  seems  to 
imply  Divine  knowledge  of  the  multitude's  secret  intentions. 
Jesus  knew  men's  hearts  and  thoughts. 

[That  they  ivould  come.]  This  would  be  more  literally,  "  that 
they  are  about  to  come." 

[TaJce  him  by  force  to  make  Mm  a  king.]  The  intention  or  wish 
was  probably  to  place  Him  at  their  head,  and  proclaim  Him 
their  king,  with  or  without  His  consent,  and  then  to  hurry  Him 
away  to  Jerusalem,  so  as  to  arrive  there  at  the  passover  feast, 
and  announce  Him  as  a  Deliverer  to  the  crowd  assembled  at 
that  time. — The  idea  evidently  in  their  mind  was,  that  one  who 
could  work  such  a  mighty  mirade  must  be  a  mighty  temporal 
Redeemer,  raised  up,  like  the  Judges  of  old,  to  break  the  bonds 
of  the  Romish  government,  and  restore  the  old  independence 
and  kingdom  to  Israel.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  there 
was  any  more  spiritual  feeling  in  the  minds  of  the  multitude. 
Of  sense  of  spiritual  need,  and  of  faith  in  our  Lord  as  a  Saviour 
from  sin,  there  is  n©  trace.  Popularity  and  the  good  opinion  of 
excited  crowds  are  both  worthless  and  temporary  things. 

Rollock  remarks  that  the  Jews  were  very  sensitive  about  the 
15 


338  EXFOSITORr   THOUGHTS. 

tyranny  and  dominion  of  the  Eomans,  while  they  did  not  feel 
the  far  greater  tyranny  and  dominion  of  sin.  lie  points  out 
that  we  who  are  expecting  the  second  advent  of  Chi  st  in  the 
present  day  should  take  care  that  we  increasingly  feel  the  burden 
and  yoke  of  sin,  from  which  Christ's  second  advent  will  deliver 
the  creation.  Otherwise  Christ's  second  advent  will  do  us  no 
more  good  than  his  first  advent  did  to  the  Jews. 

[He  departed  again  into  a  mountain... .alone.]  This  would  be 
more  literally  rendered,  "  the  mountain,"  as  at  verse  3. 

St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  both  mention  another  reason  why 
our  Lord  withdrew  to  the  mountain,  beside  His  desire  to  avoid 
the  intention  of  the  multitude.  Tliey  tell  us  that  He  "  sent  the 
multitude  away  and  departed  to  pray."  (Matt.  xiv.  23;  Mark 
ix.  46.) 

Some  think  that  a  miracle  must  have  been  wrought  when  our 
Lord  withdrew  Himself  from  the  multitude,  and  that  He  must 
have  passed  through  them  invisibly,  as  after  the  miracle  at  Be- 
thesda,  and  at  Nazareth.  Yet  it  seems  hardly  necessary  to  sup- 
pose this. 

It  is  worth  noticing  that  after  St.  Luke's  account  of  this  mira- 
cle, he  immediately  relates  that  our  Lord  asked  the  disciples, 
"Whom  say  the  people  that  I  am?"  (Luke  ix.  18.)  It  does  not 
however  follow  that  He  asked  immediatel}^,  but  after  an  interval 
of  some  days.  But  the  wish  of  the  multitude  here  related  may 
have  occasioned  the  question. 

16. —  Whe7i  even.. ..disciples^  went  down  unto  the  sea.]  St.  Matthew 
and  St.  Mark  both  say  that  our  Lord  "  constrained  "  them  to 
embark  in  the  ship  and  depart.  He  "  obhged  "  or  "  compelled  " 
them.  He  probably  saw  that  in  their  ignorance  of  the  spiritual 
nature  of  His  kingdom  they  were  ready  to  fall  in  with  the  wishes 
of  the  multitude,  and  to  proclaim  Him  a  king. 

17, — [Entered  into  a  ship.]  This  would  be  more  literally  "  the 
ship."  It  seems  to  mean  that  particular  vessel  or  fishing-boat 
which  our  Lord  and  His  disciples  always  used  on  the  lake  of 
Galilee,  and  which  probably  was  lent  for  His  use  by  the  relatives 
of  those  of  His  disciples  who  were  fishermen,  if  not  by  the  four 
themselves, — viz.,  James,  John,  Andrew,  and  Peter.  There  is 
no  necessity  for  supposing  that  when  they  left  their  calling  to 
become  disciples  they  gave  up  their  boats  so  entirely  as  to  have 
no  more  use  of  them  when  they  wished.  The  last  chapter  of 
this  very  Gospel  seems  to  prove  the  contrary.  When  Peter  said, 
*'  I  go  a  fishing,"  there  was  "  the  boat"  ready  for  them  at  once, 
(John  xxi.  3.) 

[  Went  over  the  sea....  Capernaum.]  This  would  be  more  literally 
"were  going,"  "were  in  the  act  of  going."     Capernaum  lay  on 


I 


JOHN,    CHAP.   VI.  339 

the  norfh-west  shore  of  the  lake  of  Galilee,  and  the  point  where 
the  disciples  embarked  was  on  the  noith-east  shore.  To  reach 
Capernaum  they  would  pass  the  point  where  the  Jordan  ran  into 
che  lake,  and  leave  that  point  and  the  town  of  Bethsaida  on  their 
fight  hand.  The  place  where  the  miracle  was  wrought  was  not 
at  Bethsaida  itself,  we  must  remember,  but  in  the  desert  coun- 
try and  district  lying  to  the  east  of  Bethsaida.  St.  Luke  specially 
mentions  this  (Luke  ix.  10),  and  unless  we  keep  it  in  mind  we 
shall  not  understand  St.  Mark's  words,  that  our  Lord  made  His 
disciples  "  go  to  the  other  side  before  unto  Bethsaida."  To  go 
to  Capernaum  they  must  need  go  "in  the  direction  of"  Beth- 
saida, though  they  would  leave  it  on  the  right  as  they  passed. 
Thomson,  in  the  "  Land  and  the  Book,"  maintains  this  view,  and 
Rollock,  250  years  ago,  held  the  same  opinion. 

I  repeat  the  opinion  that  I  see  no  necessity  for  the  theory  of 
Alford  and  other  commentators  that  there  were  two  Bethsaidas. 

Capernaum  was  the  city  where  our  Lord  passed  more  time, 
and  probably  worked  more  miracles,  than  He  did  in  any  other 
place  during  His  ministry.  This  is  probably  the  reason  why 
our  Lord  speaks  of  it  as  "  exalted  unto  heaven."  (Matt.  xi.  23.) 
No  city  had  such  privileges  and  saw  so  much  of  the  Son  of  God 
while  He  was  manifest  in  the  flesh. 

[/i{  was  now  darJCj  and  Jesus  was  not  come.]  The  Greek  word 
for  "  dark  "  is  always  rendered  "  darkness  "  in  other  places,  except 
John  XX.  1.  The  simple  circumstance  of  the  disciples  being  alone 
in  the  boat,  on  the  sea,  and  in  darkness,  has  been  felt  in  every 
age  to  be  an  instructive  emblem  of  the  position  of  the  Church 
of  Christ  between  the  first  and  second  advents.  Like  them,  the 
Church  is  on  a  sea  of  trouble,  and  separate  from  its  Head.  In 
estimating,  however,  the  position  and  feelings  of  the  disciples, 
we  must  not  forget  that  four  of  them  at  least  were  fishermen, 
and  familiar  from  their  youth  with  the  management  of  boat;?, 
and  all  the  dangers  of  the  lake.  We  nmst  not  therefore  think  of 
them  as  inexperienced  landsmen,  or  as  little  children  unable  to 
take  care  of  themselves. 

"We  learn  to  know  the  value  of  Christ's  company,  when  we 
have  it,  by  the  discomfort  we  experience  when  we  have  it  not. 

18. — [And  the  sea  arose... .great  wind  that  blew.]  The  Greek  word 
rendered  "  arose  "  would  be  more  literally  rendered  "  was  being 
raised  or  stirred." 

A.t  first  sight  it  may  seem  surprising  that  the  waters  of  an 
inland  lake,  like  the  sea  of  Gahlee,  could  be  so  much  agitated. 
But  it  is  remarkable  that  the  testimony  of  travellers  in  modem 
times  is  distinct,  ihat  this  lake  is  peculiarly  liable  to  be  visited 
by  vi  jlent  squalls  of  wind,  and  to  become  very  rough  while  they 


340  EXPOSITOKY  THOUGHTS. 

last.  Thomson,  the  American  traveller,  says, — "My  experienca 
in  this  region  enabled  me  to  sympathize  with  the  disciples  in 
their  long  night's  contest  with  the  wind. — I  have  seen  the  face 
of  the  lake  like  a  huge  boiling  caldron.  The  wind  howled  down 
the  valleys  from  the  north-east  and  east  with  such  fury  that  no 
efforts  of  rowers  could  have  brought  a  boat  to  shore  at  any  point 
along  that  coast. — To  understand  the  causes  of  these  sudden  and 
violent  tempests  we  must  remember  the  lake  lies  low, — six 
hundred  feet  lower  than  the  ocean, — that  water-courses  have  cut 
out  profound  ravines  and  wild  gorges,  converging  to  the  head 
of  the  lake,  and  that  these  act  like  gigantic  funnels  to  draw  down 
the  cold  winds  from  the  mountains.  On  the  occasion  referred  to 
w«^  pitclied  our  tents  on  the  shore,  and  remained  for  three  days 
and  nights  exposed  to  this  tremendous  wind.  We  had  to  dou- 
ble-pin all  the  tent-ropes,  and  frequently  were  obliged  to  hang 
with  our  whole  weight  upon  them,  to  keep  the  quivering  taber- 
nacle from  being  carried  up  bodily  into  the  air.  No  wonder  the 
disciples  toiled  and  rowed  hard  all  that  night."  In  another 
place  he  says, — "  Small  as  the  lake  is,  and  placid  in  general  as  a 
molten  mirror,  I  have  repeatedly  seen  it  quiver,  and  leap,  and 
boil  like  a  caldron,  when  driven  by  fierce  winds." — Thomson's 
"  Land  and  the  Book." 

Burkitt  remirks  that  the  position  of  the  disciples,  immediately 
tempest-tossed  after  witnessing  and  partaking  in  a  mighty  mira- 
cle, IS  an  instructive  type  of  the  common  experience  of  believers. 
After  seasons  of  peculiar  privileges  there  often  come  sharp  trials 
of  faith  and  patience. 

Tliis  sudden  trial  of  faith  by  danger  was  no  doubt  intended  to 
be  a  lesson  to  the  disciples  as  to  what  they  must  expect  in  the 
exercise  of  their  ministry.  Affliction  and  crosses  are  the  grind- 
stones on  which  God  is  constantly  sharpening  those  instruments 
which  He  uses  most. 

19. — [So  when...rowed  about  Jive  and  twenty  or  thirty  furlongs  i]  We 
might  gather  from  the  disciples  "  rowing,"  and  not  sailing,  that 
the  wind  was  again  t  them,  and  we  are  expressly  told,  both  by 
St.  Mattliew  and  St.  Mark,  that  "  the  wind  was  contrary."  From 
the  distance  they  had  rowed,  and  the  known  width  of  the  lake, 
at  tliat  particular  part  of  it,  they  were  probably  now  about  the 
middle  of  their  passage.  St.  Matthew  says, — they  were  ''  in  the 
midst  of  the  sea."  (Matt.  xiv.  24.)  This  M'ould  make  them  at 
lea  t  two  or  three  miles  from  shore,  a  fact  which  should  be  care- 
f\illy  noted  with  re'^erence  to  what  follows. 

Let  the  expression  "  twenty-five  or  thirty''  be  noted.  It  is 
not  necessary  to  define  to  a  hair's  breadth  distances  and  quantities 
in  narrating  an  event.  Even  an  inspired  writer  does  not.  He 
uses  the  cc  mmon  language  of  men,  and  such  language  as  those 


JOHN,   CHAP.   VI.  841 

present  on  the  occasion  would  have  used.  In  a  dark  niofht  they 
could  not  possibly  have  spoken  with  precise  accuracy.  John  waa 
there  himself,  and  knew  that  excessive  accuracy  is  sometiiies 
suspicious,  and  looks  like  a  made-up  story.  John  ii,  6  is  a  simi- 
lar expression. 

Bengel  says,  "  The  Holy  Spirit  knew,  and  oould  have  told 
John  precisely  how  many  furlongs  there  were.  But  in  Scripture 
he  imitates  popular  modes  of  expression." 

^  [They  see  Jesus  walking  on  the  sea,  etc.,  etc.]  This  was  undoubt- 
edly as  great  a  miracle  as  any  that  our  Lord  wrought. 

"  Moses,"  says  Theophylact,  "  as  a  servant,  by  the  power  of 
God  divided  the  sea.  But  Christ,  the  Lord  of  all,  by  His  own 
power  walked  on  the  sea." 

For  a  sohd  body  to  walk  on  the  face  of  the  water  as  on  dry 
land,  is  an  entire  suspension  of  what  are  called  the  laws  of  nature. 
It  was,  of  course,  as  easy  for  Him  by  whom  the  waters  were 
first  created  to  walk  upon  them  as  to  create  them.  But  the 
whole  proceeding  was  so  entirely  supernatural,  that  we  can  tho- 
roughly understand  the  disciples  being  "  afraid."  Nothing  is 
found  to  alarm  human  nature  so  much  as  being  suddenly  brought 
into  contact  with  anything  apparently  supernatural  and  belonging 
to  another  world,  and  especially  in  the  night.  The  feelings  called 
forth  on  such  occasions,  even  in  ungodly  and  irreligious  men,  are 
one  of  the  strongest  indirect  proofs,  that  all  men's  consciences 
recognize  an  unseen  world. 

That  a  mighty  miracle  really  was  wrought  upon  this  occasion 
is  the  only  reasonable  account  that  can  be  given  of  the  fact  that 
we  are  told.  St.  Mark  adds  to  St.  John's  account,  that  when 
Jesus  came  near  the  ship,  "  He  would  have  passed  by  them." 
(Mark  vi.  48.)  St.  Matthew  adds  another  fact  of  even  greater 
importance.  He  tells  us  that  Peter  said,  "  Lord,  if  it  be  thou, 
bid  me  come  unto  thee  on  the  wa^er.  And  he  said,  Come.  And 
when  Peter  was  come  down  out  of  the  ship,  he  walked  on  the 
water  to  go  to  Jesas."  (Matt.  xiv.  28,  29.)  Such  a  fict  as  this 
cannot  possibly  be  explained  away.  Not  only  did  our  Lord  walk 
on  the  water  Himself,  but  He  also  gave  one  of  His  twelve 
apostles  power  to  do  the  same. 

To  say  in  the  face  of  such  facts  as  these,  that  there  was  in 
reality  no  miracle, — that  the  disciples  were  mistaken, — that  our 
Lord  was  only  walking  on  the  shore  near  the  vessel, — that  tha 
superstitious  fear  of  the  disciples  made  them  fancy  that  He  was 
walking  on  the  sea, — that  they  finally  put  to  shore,  and  took 
Him  on  board, — to  say  such  things  as  these  pleases  some  persons 
who  profess  not  to  believe  any  miracles  at  all !  But  such  views 
cannot  possibly  be  reconciled  with  the  account  of  what  really 


842  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

happened,  given  by  two  witnesses,  Matthew  and  John,  who 
were  actually  present  on  the  occasion,  and  by  another  writer, — 
viz.,  Mark,  who  was  intimate  with  that  very  Peter  who  walked 
on  the  water  himself. 

If  tlie  disciples  were  "  in  the  midst  of  the  sea,"  and  two  or 
three  miles  from  shore,  how  could  they  possibly  have  seen  our 
Lord  walking  on  the  shore  ? 

If  it  Avas  "  dark  "  when  these  things  happened,  it  stands  to 
reason  that  they  could  not  distinguish  anyone  on  shore,  even 
supposing  that  they  were  not  two  miles  oflf. 

If  there  was  a  heavy  gale  blowing,  and  the  waves  were  rough, 
it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  they  could  hold  a  conversation  with 
anyone  walking  on  shore. 

The  plain  truth  is  that  it  requires  far  more  faith  to  accept  such 
improbable  and  preposterous  explanations  as  these,  than  to  take 
the  whole  account  simply  as  we  find  it,  and  to  believe  that  a  real 
mighty  miracle  was  wrought. — Unless  men  are  prepared  to  say 
that  Matthew,  Mark,  and  John,  wrote  accounts  of  the  events  of 
this  night,  which  are  incorrect,  and  not  trustworthy,  it  is  impos- 
sible for  any  honest  and  unprejudiced  person  to  avoid  the  con- 
clusion, that  a  miracle  took  place. — Of  course,  if  Matthew,  Mark, 
and  John  give  incorrect  accounts,  and  are  not  to  be  trusted  here, 
they  are  not  to  be  trusted  anywhere,  and  all  their  records  of  our 
Lord's  doings  and  sayings  become  utterly  worthless.  This 
unhappily  is  the  very  result  to  which  many  would  be  glad  to 
lead  us.  From  denying  all  miracles  to  downright  infidehty  is 
nothing  but  a  regular  succession  of  steps.  If  a  man  begins  with 
throwing  overboard  the  miracles,  he  cannot  stop  logically  till  he 
has  given  up  the  Bible  and  Christianity. 

20. — [But  he  saith,  It  is  I;  he  not  afraid.']  Our  Lord's  tenderness 
for  His  disciples'  feelings  appears  beautifully  here.  No  sooner 
does  He  see  lear  than  He  proceeds  to  calm  it.  He  assures  them 
that  the  figure  they  see  walking  on  the  deep  is  no  spirit  or  ghost, 
— no  enemy  or  object  of  dread.  It  is  their  own  beloved  Master. 
His  voice,  well-known  as  it  must  have  been,  would,  of  course, 
help  to  calm  their  fears.  Yet  even  that  was  not  enough  tiU 
Peter  had  said,  "  If  it  be  thou,  bid  me  come  to  thee." 


The  practical  remark  has  often  been  made,  that  many  of  the 
things  which  now  frighten  Chrislians  and  fill  them  with  anxiety, 
would  cease  to  frighten  them  if  they  would  endeavour  to  see  the 
Lord  Jesus  in  all,  ordering  every  providence,  and  overruling 
everything,  so  that  not  a  hair  falls  to  the  giound  without  Him. 
They  are  happy  who  can  hear  His  voice  through  the  thickest 
clouds  and  darkness,  and  above  the  loudest  winds  and  storms, 
saying,  "  It  is  I ;  be  not  afraid." 


vr.  343 

It  has  been  thought  by  some  that  the  words,  "  It  is  I,"  might 
be  more  literally  rendered,  "I  am,"  and  that  they  are  intended 
to  refer  to  the  name  of  God,  so  familiar  to  Jews,  "  I  am."  But 
I  doubt  the  correctness  of  the  idea.  It  is  a  pious  thought,  but 
hardly  in  keeping  with  the  context  and  the  circumstances  of  the 
occurrence.  Our  Lord  desired  first  to  relieve  the  fears  of  His 
disciples  by  showing  them  who  it  was  that  they  feared ;  and  tha 
Greek  words  for  "  It  is  I,"  are  the  only  words  that  He  could 
well  have  used. 

It  may  be  noted  here  that  there  seems  to  be  no  feehng  or 
passion  to  which  Christians  are  so  liable  as  "fear."  There  is 
none,  certainly,  against  which  our  Lord  so  ofcen  exhorts  His 
disciples.  "Fear  not: — be  not  afraid: — let  not  your  heart  be 
troubled :"  are  very  common  sayings  of  His. 

21. —  [Then  they  willingly  received... ship.]  This  would  be  rendered 
more  literally  :  "  Then  they  were  willing,"  "  they  were  glad,  and 
wished." — It  evidently  imphes,  that  at  first  the  disciples  were 
afraid  of  our  Lord.  But  as  soon  as  they  recognized  Him,  their 
fears  departed;  and  so  far  from  wishing  to  be  rid  of  the  figure 
they  had  seen  walking  on  the  sea,  their  great  desire  now  was  to 
receive  Him  on  board. 

[Immediately  the  ship  was  at  the  land  whither  they  went.]  This 
sentence  either  means  that  shortly  after  our  Lord  joined  the  dis- 
ciples in  the  boat  they  reached  their  destination,  or  that  imme- 
diately, by  miraculous  agency,  they  arrived  at  the  shore.  There 
is,  perhaps,  no  occasion  to  suppose  any  other  miracle.  Both 
Matthew  and  Mark  distinctly  say  that  "  the  wind  ceased,"  as 
soon  as  our  Lord  entered  the  boat.  The  storm,  according  to  the 
custom  of  storms  on  the  lake,  suddenly  ceased,  and  the  disciples 
consequently  had  no  trouble  in  rowing  to  the  shore.  The  wind 
was  no  longer  against  them;  and  the  sea,  in  so  small  a  compass 
as  the  Lake  of  Galilee,  would  naturally  soon  go  down. 

The  old  practical  lesson  still  remains  to  be  remembered. 
Christ's  Church  is  now  a  tossed  ship,  in  the  midst  of  a  stormy  sea. 
The  great  Master  has  gone  up  into  heaven  to  intercede  for  His 
people,  left  alone  for  awhile,  and  to  return.  When  Jesus  returns 
again  to  His  tossed  and  afflicted  Church,  at  the  second  advent, 
their  troubles  will  soon  be  over.  They  will  soon  be  in  harbour. 
His  voice,  which  will  fill  the  wicked  with  terror,  will  fill  His 
people  with  joy. 

The  place  where  they  landed  was  evidently  Capernaum,  or 
close  to  it.  The  disccurse  which  follows  was  at  any  rate  finii^hed 
(wherever  it  may  have  begun)  in  "the  synagogue  at  Capernaum," 
and  folic  ws  in  unbrok(m  succession  after  the  events  we  have  now 
been  considering.     The  statement  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark, 


844 


EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS, 


tljat  our  Lord  and  His  disciples  reached  the  shore  in  '  the  land 
of  Genesaret,"  is  quite  reconcileable  with  St.  John's  account. 
The  "  land  of  Genesaret"  was  a  plain,  on  the  north-west  coast 
of  the  Lake  of  Galilee,  extending  from  Magdala  at  the  south,  to 
Capernaum  at  the  north. 

In  leaving  this  passage,  I  call  the  reader's  attention  to  tho 
very  marked  and  peculiar  position  which  the  two  miracles 
recorded  by  St.  John  in  this  chapter  occupy.  They  immediately 
precede  that  wonderful  discourse  in  the  synagogue  of  Capernaum, 
in  which  our  Lord  proclaims  Himself  to  be  "  the  living  bread 
which  came  down  from  heaven  and  giveth  life  to  the  world," 
and  declares  that  "  except  we  eat  His  flesh  and  drink  His  blood 
we  have  no  life  in  us." — I  believe  that  the  two  miracles  were 
intended  to  prepare  the  minds  of  the  disciples  to  receive  the 
mighty  truths  which  the  discourse  contained.  Did  they  stumble 
at  the  announcement  that  He  was  the  ''bread  of  God,"  and 
"  gave  life  to  the  world  "  ?  It  would  surely  help  their  weak  faith 
to  remember  that  the  very  day  before  they  liad  seen  Him  sud- 
denly supply  the  wants  of  a  mighty  multitude  with  five  loaves 
and  two  fishes. — Did  they  stumble  at  the  doctrine,  that  "  His 
flesh  was  meat  indeed  and  his  blood  drink  indeed  "  ?  It  would 
surely  assist  their  feeble  spiritual  apprehension  to  remember 
that  the  very  night  before  they  had  seen  that  body  walking  on 
the  face  of  the  sea.  They  had  had  ocular  proof  that  there  was  a 
deep  mystery  about  our  Lord's  human  nature,  and  that  although 
He  was  real  and  true  man,  there  was  at  the  same  time  some- 
thing about  Him  far  above  man.  These  things  I  believe  are 
worth  noticing.  The  connection  between  our  Lord's  miracles 
and  His  teaching  is  often  far  closer  than  at  first  sight  appears. 


JOHN  VL  22—27. 


22  The  day  following,  when  the 
people  which  stood  on  the  other 
side  of  the  sea  saw  that  there  was 
none  other  boat  there,  save  that  one 
whereiuto  his  disciples  were  enter- 
ed, and  that  Jesus  went  not  with 
his  disciples  into  the  boat,  but  that 
his  disciples  were  gone  away 
alone ; 

23  (Howbeit  there  came  other 
boats  from  Tiberias  nigh  unto  the 
place  where  they  did  eat  bread, 
after  that  the  Lord  had  given 
thanks:) 


24  When  the  people  therefore 
saw  that  Jesus  was  not  there, 
neither  his  disciples,  they  also  took 
shipping,  and  came  to  Capernaum, 
seeking  for  Jesus. 

25  And  when  they  had  found 
him  on  the  other  side  of  tho  sea, 
they  said  unto  him.  Rabbi,  w)»ca 
earnest  thou  hither  ? 

2G  Jesus  answered  them  and 
said,  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you, 
Ye  seek  me,  not  because  ye  saw  the 
miracles,  but  because  ye  did  eat  of 
the  loaves,  and  wcfe  filled. 


2  7  Labou  r  not  for  the  meat  which 
perieheth,  but  for  that  meat  which 
eiidureth    unto     everlastinoc    Ufe, 


345 

which  the  Son  of  man  shall  give 
unto  you:  for  him  hath  (xod  the 
Father  sealed. 


We  should  mark  first,  in  this  passage,  icJiat  Jcjiowledge 
of  niaji's  heart  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  possesses.  We  see 
Him  exposing  the  fiilse  motives  of  those  who  followed 
Him  for  the  sake  of  the  loaves  and  fishes.  They  had  fol- 
lowed Him  across  the  Lake  of  Galilee.  They  seemed  at 
first  sight  ready  to  believe  in  Him,  and  do  Him  honour. 
But  He  knew  the  inward  springs  of  their  conduct,  and 
was  not  deceived.  "  Ye  seek  me,"  He  said,  "  not  because 
ye  saw  the  miracles,  but  because  ye  did  eat  of  the  loaves, 
and  were  filled." 

The  Lord  Jesus,  we  should  never  forget,  is  still  the 
same.  He  never  changes.  He  reads  the  secret  motives 
of  all  who  profess  and  call  themselves  Christians.  He 
knows  exactly  why  they  do  all  they  do  in  their  religion. 
The  reasons  why  they  go  to  Church,  and  why  they  receive 
the  sacrament, — why  they  attend  family  prayers,  and  why 
they  keep  Sunday  holy, — all  are  naked  and  opened  to  the 
eyes  of  the  great  Head  of  the  Church.  By  Him  actions 
are  weighed  as  well  as  seen.  "  Man  looketh  on  the  out 
ward  appearance,  but  the  Lord  looketh  at  the  heart."  (1 
Sam.  xvi.  7.) 

Let  us  be  real,  true,  and  sincere  in  our  religion,  what- 
ever else  we  are.  The  sinfulness  of  hypocrisy  is  very  great, 
but  its  folly  is  greater  still  It  is  not  hard  to  deceive  minis- 
ters, relatives,  and  friends..  A  little  decent  outward  profes- 
sion will  often  go  a  long  way.  But  it  is  impossible  to  deceive 
Christ.  "  His  eyes  are  as  a  flame  of  fire."  (Rev.  i.  14.) 
He  sees  us  through  and  through.  Happy  are  those  who 
can  say,—"  Thou,  Lord,  who  knowest  all  things,  knowest 
that  we  love  thee."  (John  xxi.  17.) 

We  should  mark,  secondly,  in  this  passage,  lohat  Christ 
forbids.     He  told  the  crowds  who  followed  Him  so  dili 

15* 


346  EXPOSITOKY  THOUGHTS. 

gently  for  the  loaves  and  fishes,  "  not  to  labour  for  the 
meat  that  perisheth."  It  was  a  remarkable  sayhig,  and 
demands  explanation. 

Our  Lord,  we  may  be  sure,  did  not  mean  to  encourage 
idleness.  It  would  be  a  great  mistake  to  suppose  this 
Labour  was  the  appointed  lot  of  Adam  in  Paradise. 
Labour  was  ordained  to  be  man's  occupation  after  the 
fall.  Labour  is  honourable  in  all  men.  No  one  need  be 
ashamed  of  belonging  to  *'  the  working  classes."  Our 
Lord  himself  worked  in  the  carpenter's  shop  at  Naza- 
reth.    St.  Paul  wrought  as  a  tent-maker  with  his  own  hands. 

What  our  Lord  did  mean  to  rebuke  was,  that  excessive 
attention  to  labour  for  the  body,  while  the  soul  is  neglected, 
which  prevails  everywhere  in  the  world.  What  He  re- 
proved was,  the  common  habit  of  labouring  only  for  the 
things  of  time,  and  letting  alone  the  things  of  eternity 
— of  minding  only  the  life  that  now  is,  and  disregarding 
the  life  to  come.  Against  this  habit  He  delivers  a  solemn 
warning. 

Surely,  we  must  all  feel  our  Lord  did  not  say  the  words 
before  us  without  good  cause.  They  are  a  startling  cau- 
tion which  should  ring  in  the  ears  of  many  in  these  latter 
days.  How  many  in  every  rank  of  life  are  doing  the  very 
thing  against  which  Jesus  warns  us  !  They  are  labouring 
night  and  day  for  "  the  meat  that  perisheth,"  and  doing 
nothing  for  their  immortal  souls.  Happy  are  those  who 
learn  betimes  the  respective  value  of  soul  and  body,  and 
give  the  first  and  best  place  in  their  thoughts  to  salvation. 
One  thing  is  needful.  He  that  seeks  first  the  kingdom  of 
God,  will  never  fail  to  find  *'  all  other  things  added  to  him." 
(Matt.  vi.  33.) 

We  should  mark,  thirdly,  in  this  passage,  what  Christ 
advises.  He  tells  us  to  "  labour  for  the  meat  that  endureth 
to  everlasting  life."  He  would  have  us  take  pains  to  find 
food  and  satisfaction  for  our  souls.     That  food  is  provided 


JOHN,    CHAP.    VI.  347 

in  rich  abundance  in  Him.  But  he  that  would  have  it 
must  diligently  seek  it. 

How  are  we  to  labour  ?  There  is  but  one  answer.  We 
must  labour  in  the  use  of  all  appointed  means.  "We  must 
read  our  Bibles,  like  men  digging  for  hidden  treasure.  We 
must  wrestle  earnestly  in  prayer,  like  men  contending  with 
a  deadly  enemy  for  life.  We  must  take  our  whole  heart 
to  the  house  of  God,  and  worship  and  hear  like  those  who 
listen  to  the  reading  of  a  will.  We  must  fight  daily  against 
sin,  the  world,  and  the  devil,  like  those  who  fight  for 
liberty,  and  must  conquer,  or  be  slaves.  These  are  the 
ways  we  must  walk  in  if  we  would  find  Christ,  and  be 
found  of  Him.  This  is  "labouring."  .This  is  the  secret 
of  getting  on  about  our  souls. 

Labour  like  this  no  doubt  is  very  uncommon.  In  carry- 
ing it  on  we  shall  have  little  encouragement  from  man,  and 
shall  often  be  told  that  we  are  "  extreme,"  and  go  too  far. 
Strange  and  absurd  as  it  is,  the  natural  man  is  always 
fancying  that  we  may  take  too  much  thought  about  reli- 
gion, and  refusing  to  see  that  we  are  far  more  likely  to 
take  too  much  thought  about  the  world.  But  whatever 
man  may  say,  the  soul  will  never  get  spiritual  food  without 
labour.  We  must  "strive,"  we  must  "run,"  we  must 
"fight,"  we  must  throw  our  whole  heart  into  our  soul's 
affairs.  It  is  "  the  violent"  who  take  the  kingdom.  (Matt, 
xi.  12.) 

We  should  mark,  lastly,  in  this  passage,  ichat  a  promise 
Christ  holds  out.  He  tells  us  that  He  himself  will  give 
eternal  food  to  all  who  seek  it :  "  The  Son  of  man  shall 
give  you  the  meat  that  endureth  unto  everlasting  life." 

How  gracious  and  enconyaging  these  words  are  !  What- 
ever we  need  for  the  relief  of  our  hungering  souls,  Christ 
is  ready  and  willing  to  bestow.  Whatever  mercy,  grace, 
peace,  strength  we  require,  the  Son  of  man  will  give  freely, 
immediiately^  ajbu^dantly,  and  eternally.    He  is  "  sealed," 


348  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

and  api^ointed,  and  commissioned  by  God  tlie  Father  for 
this  very  purpose.  Like  Joseph  in  the  Egyptian  famine,  it 
is  His  office  to  be  the  Friend,  and  Almoner,  and  Reliever 
of  a  sinful  world.  He  is  far  more  willing  to  give  than  man 
is  to  receive.  The  more  sinners  apply  to  Him,  the  better 
]Ie  is  pleased. 

And  now,  as  we  leave  this  rich  passage,  let  us  ask  our- 
selves, what  use  we  make  of  it  ?  For  what  are  we  labour- 
ing ourselves  ?  What  do  we  know  of  lasting  food  and 
satisfaction  for  our  inward  man?  Never  let  us  rest  till 
we  have  eaten  of  the  meat  which  Christ  alone  can  give. 
They  that  are  content  with  any  other  spiritual  food  will 
sooner  or  later  "lie  down  in  sorrow."  (Isa.  1.  11.) 

Notes.    John  YI.  22—27. 

22. — {The  day  following,  etc^  In  this,  and  the  three  following 
verses,  we  have  an  instance  of  the  extreme  minuteness  with 
whicli  St.  John  describes  all  the  particulars  connected  with  any 
of  the  miracles  of  our  Lord  which  he  records, — Here,  for  exam- 
ple, he  tells  us  that  our  Lord's  remaining  behind,  and  not  accom- 
panying His  disciples  when  they  went  into  the  boat,  was 
observed  by  the  multitude;  and  that  nevertheless  they  could 
not  find  our  Lord  the  next  morning,  and  were  puzzled  to  account 
for  His  being  found  at  Capernaum  when  they  got  there. — All 
these  little  things  help  to  prove  that  the  circumstances  of  our 
Lord's  joining  the  disciples  was  something  miraculous,  and  c  n- 
not  be  explained  away,  as  some  rationalists  pretend  to  say.  In 
particular^  the  question,  "  When  camest  thou  hither?  "  (ver.  25) 
is  plain  evidence  that  the  multitude  did  not  think  it  possible  for 
our  Lord  to  have  walked  along  the  shore,  as  some  modern  writ- 
ers suggest,  and  did  not  understand  how  He  got  to  Capernaum 
except  in  a  boat. 

In  each  of  the  seven  great  miracles  recorded  by  St.  John,  this 
fulness  and  minuteness  is  very  noticeable.  Had  he  been  inspired 
to  relate  as  many  miracles  as  we  find  in  Matthew  and  Mark,  his 
Gospel  would  have  been  fifty  chapters,  instead  of  twenty-one. 
Writing  long  after  the  other  Gospel  writers,  and  at  a  time  when 
many  who  witnessed  our  Lord's  miracles  were  dead,  there  was  a 
fitness  and  wisdom  in  his  supplying  the  abundant  particulars 
which  characterize  his  descriptions. 

\^The  people  luhich  stood  on  the  other  side  of  the  sea.]      Thia 


JOHN,    CHAP.    VI.  849 

means  the  multitude,  or  some  of  them,  whom  Jesus  had  fed  on 
tlie  north-east  shore  of  the  lake,  and  whom  the  disciples  had 
L  ft  standing  near  the  banks  when  they  embarked,  belore  our 
Lord  sent  them  away.  Matthew  and  Mark  both  mention  that 
our  Lord  first  made  the  disciples  embark,  and  then  sent  the  mul- 
titude away,  and  retired  to  the  mountain  to  pray. 

20. — [Howheit  there  came  other  boats,  etc.]  This  verse  either  means 
that  other  boats  came  froai  Tiberias  the  morning  after  the  mira- 
cle of  feeding  the  multitude,  which  were  not  there  the  evening 
that  the  disciples  embarked ;  or  else  it  means  that  there  were 
other  boats  from  Tiberias  not  far  from  the  place  where  the  mini- 
cle  was  worked,  though  there  were  none  actually  at  the  spot 
where  the  disciples  embarked,  except  their  one  boat.  The 
verse  is  carefully  inserted  parenthetically,  in  order  to  account 
for  the  multitude  following  our  Lord  to  Capernaum.  Had 
it  not  been  inserted,  the  infidel  would  have  asked  us  tri- 
umphantly, to  exp'ain  how  the  people  could  have  followed 
our  Lord,  when  they  had  no  boats !  We  need  not  doubt  that 
every  apparent  discrepancy  and  difficulty  in  the  Gospel  narrative 
would  equally  admit  of  explanation,  if  we  only  knew  how  to 
fill  up  the 


[After  that  the  Lord  had  given  thanks.]  This  is  purposely 
inserted  to  remind  us  that  it  was  no  common  eating  of  bread 
that  had  taken  place,  but  an  eating  of  food  miraculously  multi- 
plied after  our  Lord  had  blessed  it. 

24. — [  When  the  people.]  There  is  no  occasion  to  suppose  that  this 
expression  means  the  whole  five  thousand,  whom  our  Lord 
had  fed.  Eor  one  thing,  we  are  distinctly  told  that  our  Lord 
*'  sent  them  away,"  and  the  greater  part  probably  dispeised,  and 
went  their  way  to  their  homes,  or  to  Jerusalem  to  the  passover. 
For  another  thing,  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  so  large  a  multi- 
tude could  find  boats  enough  to  convey  them  across  the  lake. 
It  evidently  means  the  remaining  portion  of  the  multitude,  and 
probably  included  many  who  followed  our  Lord  about  from 
place  to  place  wherever  He  went  in  Gralilee,  without  any  spiritual 
feehng,  from  a  vague  love  of  excitement,  and  in  the  hope  of 
ultimately  getting  something  by  it. 

[They  also  took  shipping.]  This  means  that  they  embarked 
in  the  boats  which  came  from  Tiberias,  and  cros-ed  over  the 
lake, 
211. — [And  when  they  found  Him  on  the  other  side  of  the  sea.]  The 
place  where  they  found  our  Lord  was  on  the  north-west  side  of 
the  lake  of  Galilee,  on  the  opposite  side  from  that  where  the 
miracle  of  feeding  the  multitude  was  wrought.  The  precise 
spot  however  where  they  found  Him  is  a  point  which  it  is  not 
very  easy  to  decide.—  Of  course  if  we  read  the  discourse  which 


850  EXPOSITOKY   THOUGHTS. 

follows  as  one  unbroken  discourse,  all  spoken  at  one  time  with- 
out breaks  or  pauses,  except  such  as  arise  from  the  remarks  of  the 
people  who  heard  our  Lord,  there  can  be  no  doubt  where  our 
Lord  was.  The  fiflj-ninth  verse  settles  the  question.  ''  These 
things  said  he  in  the  synagogue  as  he  taught  in  Capernaum.'' — 
But  if  we  suppose  a  break  at  the  foriieth  verse,  where  the  Jews 
begin  "  to  murmur,"  and  a  short  interval  before  the  d'scourse 
was  resumed,  it  seems  highly  probable  that  the  crowd  found 
our  Lord  at  the  landing-place  at  Capernaum,  or  just  outside  the 
city, — that  the  discourse  began  there  and  continued  up  to  the 
fortieth  verse, — and  that  then  after  a  short  pause  it  was  resumed 
"  in  the  synagogue  of  Capernaum."  It  certainly  does  seem 
rather  abrupt  and  unnatural  to  suppose  the  crowd  landing  at 
Capernaum,  going  up  to  the  synagoi^ue,  and  there  beginning  tlie 
conversation  with  the  question,  "  When  camest  thou  hither  ?  " 

[When  camest  thou  hither f]  The  question  evidently  implies 
surprise  at  finding  our  Lord,  and  inability  to  understand  how 
He  could  possibly  have  got  to  Capernaum,  if  He  did  not  go  in 
the  boat  with  His  disciples.  It  is  a  question,  be  it  remarked,  to 
which  our  Lord  returned  no  answer.  He  knew  the  state  of 
mind  of  those  who  asked  it,  and  knew  that  it  would  be  of  no 
use  to  tell  them  when  He  had  come,  or  how. 

Wordsworth's  idea  that  there  is  a  mystical  reference  in  this 
question  to  the  manner  and  time  of  Christ's  presence  in  the 
Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  appears  to  me  very  fanciful  and 
far-fetched. 

2G. — [Jesus  answered,  Verily,  verily,  I  say.]  This  solemn  expression, 
as  usual  in  St.  John's  Gospel,  introduces  a  series  of  sayings  of 
the  deepest  importance.  The  very  first  was  a  sharp  and  cutting 
rebuke  of  the  carnal-mindedness  of  those  whom  our  Lord 
addressed. 

[Ye  seek  me. ..not..miracles...eat... filled.']  This  was  a  severe  say- 
ing, and  one  which  He,  who  knew  all  hearts  and  read  all  secret 
motives,  could  say  with  peculiar  power.  It  is  a  sad  exposure  of 
the  true  reason  why  many  followed  our  Lord,  both  0:1  this  occa- 
sion and  on  others.  It  was  not  now  even  desire  to  see  miracle^ 
performed,  as  it  nad  been  the  day  before  (see  verse  2).  These, 
after  a  time,  when  the  novelty  was  passed,  would  cease  to  asto- 
nisli  and  attract.  It  was  a  lower  and  more  carnal  motive  still.  It 
was  the  mere  wish  to  be  fed  again  with  loaves  and  fishes.  They 
wanted  to  get  something  more  out  of  our  Lord.  They  had  been 
fed  oi.ce,  and  they  would  like  to  be  fed  again. 

The  poor,  and  mean,  and  carnal  mot''  res  which  induce  men  to 
irnke  some  religious  profession,  are  painfully  exhibited  here. 
Perhaps  we  have  but  a  faint  notion  how  little  the  reasons  of 
many  for  coming  to  public  worship  or  communion  would  bear 


JOHN,   CHAP.   VI.  851 

sifting  and  examination.  We  may  be  sure  that  all  is  not  gold 
that  glittei.-J,  and  that  many  a  professor  is  rotten  at  heart.  It 
was  so  even  under  our  Lord's  ministry,  and  much  more  now. 
Augustine  remarks  how  seldom  "  Jesus  is  sought  for  the  sake 
of  Jesus." 

Our  Lord's  perfect  knowledge  of  the  S3cret  springs  of  men's 
actions  is  strikingly  exhibited  here.  We  cannot  deceive  Him 
even  if  we  deceive  man  ;  and  our  true  characters  will  be  exposed 
in  the  day  of  judgment,  if  they  are  not  found  out  before  we  die. 
Whatever  we  are  in  religion,  let  us  be  honest  and  true. 

To  follow  Christ  for  the  sake  of  a  few  loaves  and  fishes  seems 
miserable  work.  To  some  who  know  nothing  of  poverty,  it  may 
appear  almost  incredible  that  a  crowd  of  people  should  have 
done  it.  Perhaps  those  only  can  thoroughly  understand  it  who 
have  seen  much  of  the  poor  in  pauperized  rural  parishes.  They 
can  understand  the  immense  importance  which  a  poor  man 
attaches  to  having  his  belly  flllefl,  and  getting  a  dinner  or  a  sup- 
per. Mosti  of  our  Lord's  followers  in  Galilee  were  probably 
very  poor. 

To  deal  plainly  witli  people  about  their  spiritual  condition 
and  faithfully  expose  their  false  motives,  if  we  know  them,  is  the 
positive  duty  of  ministers  and  teachers.  It  is  no  kindness  or 
charity  to  flatter  professing  Christians,  and  tell  them  they  are 
children  of  God,  and  going  to  heaven,  if  we  know  that  they  only 
make  a  religious  profession  for  the  sake  of  what  they  can  get. 

Wisdom  and  discrimination  in  giving  temporal  relief  to  the 
poor  are  very  necessary  things  in  ministers,  and  indeed  in  all 
Christians.  Unless  we  take  heed  what  we  do  in  such  matters, 
we  do  more  harm  than  good.  To  be  always  feeding  the  poor 
and  giving  money  to  those  who  make  some  profession  of  religion, 
is  the  surest  way  to  train  up  a  generation  of  hypocrites,  and  to 
inflict  lasting  injury  on  souls. 

27. — [Labour  not,  etc... sealed.]  This  verse  is  peculiarly  full  of  in- 
structive lessons.  (1.)  There  is  something  forbidden.  We  are 
not  to  labour  exclusively,  or  excessively,  for  the  satisfaction  of 
our  bodily  wants,  for  that  food  which  only  perishes  in  the  using, 
and  only  does  us  a  little  temporary  good.  (2.)  There  is  something 
commanded.  We  ought  to  work  hard  and  strive  for  that  spiritual 
food, — that  supply  for  the  wants  of  our  souls,  which  once  obtained 
is  an  everlasting  possession.  (3.)  There  is  something  promised. 
The  Son  of  man,  even  Jesus  Christ,  is  ready  to  give  to  every  one 
who  desires  to  have  it,  that  spiritual  food  which  endures  for  ever. 
(4.)  There  is  something  declared.  The  Son  of  man,  Jesus  Christ, 
has  been  designated  and  appointed  by  God  the  Father  for  this 
very  purpose,  to  be  the  dispenser  of  thi?  spiritual  food  to  all  who 
desire  it. 


352  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

The  whole  verse  is  a  strong  proof  that  however  carnal  and 
wicked  men  may  be,  we  should  never  hesitate  to  offer  to  them 
freely  and  fully  the  salvation  of  the  Gospel.  Bad  as  the  motives 
of  these  Jews  were,  we  see  our  Lord,  in  the  same  breath,  first 
exposing  their  sin,  and  then  showing  them  their  remedy. 

The  figure  of  speech  used  by  our  Lord,  which  supplies  the 
key-note  to  the  whole  subsequent  di^^course,  is  a  beautiful  in- 
stance of  that  divine  wisdom  with  which  He  suited  His  language 
to  the  mental  condition  of  those  He  spoke  to.  He  saw  the 
crowd  coming  to  Him  for  food.  He  seizes  the  idea,  and  bids 
them  labour  not  for  bodily  but  spiritual  food.  Just  so  when  He 
saw  the  rich  young  man  come  to  Him,  He  bade  him  "  sell  all  and 
give  to  the  poor." — Just  so  when  the  Samaritan  woman  met  Him 
at  the  well,  as  she  came  to  draw  water.  He  told  her  of  living 
water. — Just  so  when  Nicodemus  came  to  Him,  proud  of  hia 
Jewish  birth,  He  tells  him  of  a  new  birth  which  he  needed. 

When  our  Lord  said,  "  labour  not  for  the  meat  that  perisheth," 
we  must  not  for  a  moment  suppose  that  He  meant  to  encourage 
idleness,  and  the  neglect  of  all  lawful  means  in  order  to  get  our 
living.  It  is  a  kind  of  expression  which  is  not  uncommon  in 
the  Bible,  when  two  things  are  put  in  comparison.  Thus,  when 
our  Lord  says  "  If  any  man  come  after  me,  and  hate  not  his  father 
and  mother  and  wife  and  children,  etc.,  he  cannot  be  my  disciple," 
we  see  at  a  glance  that  these  words  cannot  be  taken  literally. 
They  only  mean  "  if  any  man  does  not  love  me  more  than  fxther," 
etc.  (Luke  xiv.  26.)  So  here  the  simple  meaning  is  that  we 
ought  to  take  far  more  pains  about  the  supply  of  the  wants  of 
our  souls  than  of  our  bodies.  See  also  1  Cor.  vii.  29 ;  2  Cor.  iv, 
18 ;  1  Sam.  viii.  7 ;  John  xii.  44. 

When  our  Lord  says,  "  labour  for  the  meat  that  eodureth," 
etc.,  I  think  He  teaches  very  plainly  that  it  is  the  duty  of  every 
one  to  use  every  means,  and  endeavour  in  every  way  to  promote 
the  welfiire  of  his  soul.  In  the  use  of  prayer,  the  Bible,  and 
the  public  preaching  of  God's  Word  we  are  specially  to  labour. 
Our  responsibility  and  accountableness,  the  duty  of  effort  and 
exertion,  appear  to  me  to  stand  out  unmistakeably  in  the 
expression.  It  is  like  the  commands  "  Strive,  Repent,  Believe, 
Be  converted,  Save  yourselves  from  this  untoward  generation. 
Awake,  Arise,  Come,  Pray."  It  is  nothing  less  than  wicked  to 
stand  still,  splitting  hairs,  raising  difficulties,  and  pretending 
inability,  in  the  face  of  such  expressions  as  these.  What  God 
commands  man  must  always  try  to  obey.  Whatever  language 
Christ  uses,  ministers  and  teachers  must  never  shrink  from 
using  likewise. 

The  "  meat  that  endureth  to  everlasting  life,"  must  doubtless 
mean  that  satisfaction  of  the  cravings  of  soul  and  consciencoj 


JOHN,    CHAP.   VT.  353 

which  is  the  grand  want  of  human  nature.  Mercy  and  grace, 
pardon  of  sin  and  a  new  heart,  are  the  two  great  gifts  which 
alone  can  fill  the  soul,  and  once  given  are  never  taken  away,  but 
endure  for  ever.  Both  here  and  in  many  other  places,  we  must 
always  remember,  that  "  meat '  did  n^t  mean  exclusively  "  flesh" 
in  the  days  when  the  Bible  was  translated,  as  it  does  now.  The 
Greek  word  rendered  "  meat "  here  means  simply  "  food  "  of  any 
kind. 

When  our  Lord  says,  "  The  Son  of  man  shall  give  you  the 
meat  that  endureth  to  everlasting  life,"  He  appears  to  me  to 
make  one  of  the  widest  and  most  general  offers  to  unconverted 
sinners  that  we  have  anywhere  in  the  Bible.  The  men  to 
whom  He  was  speaking  were,  beyond  question,  carnal-minded 
and  unconverted  men.  Yet  even  to  them  Jesus  says,  "  The  Son 
of  man  shall  give  unto  you."  To  me  it  seems  an  unmistakeable 
statement  of  Christ's  willingness  and  readiness  to  give  pardon 
and  grace  to  any  sinner.  It  seems  to  me  to  warrant  ministers 
in  proclaiming  Christ's  readiness  to  save  any  one,  and  in  offering 
salvation  to  any  one,  if  he  will  only  repent  and  believe  the  Gos- 
pel. The  favourite  notion  of  some,  that  Christ  is  to  be  offered 
only  to  the  elect, — that  grace  and  pardon  are  to  be  exhibited  but 
not  offered  to  a  congregation, — that  we  ought  not  to  say  broadly 
and  fully  to  all  whom  we  preach  to,  Christ  is  ready  and  willing 
to  save  you, — such  notions,  I  say,  appear  to  me  entirely  irrecon- 
cileable  with  the  language  of  our  Lord.  Election,  no  doubt, 
is  a  mighty  truth  and  a  precious  privilege.  Complete  and  full 
redemption  no  doubt  is  the  possession  of  none  but  the  elect. 
But  how  easy  it  is,  in  holding  these  glorious  truths,  to  become 
more  systematic  than  the  Bible,  and  to  spoil  the  Gospel  by 
cramping  and  limiting  it! 

When  our  Lord  says,  "  Him  hath  God  the  Father  sealed,"  He 
probably  refers  to  the  custom  of  setting  apart  for  any  specific 
purpose,  and  marking  for  any  peculiar  use  by  a  seal.  So  also 
deeds  and  public  documents  were  sealed  to  testify  their  execution 
and  validity,  and  give  them  authority.  So  it  is  said  in  Esther : 
"  The  writing  that  is  written  in  the  king's  name,  and  sealed  with 
the  king's  ring,  may  no  man  reverse."  (Esther  viii.  8.)  The 
expression  applied  to  our  Lord  in  this  place  certainly  stands 
alone,  but  I  think  there  can  be  little  doubt  as  to  its  meaning.  It 
signifies  that  in  the  eternal  counsels  of  God  the  Father,  He  has 
sealed,  commissioned,  designated,  and  appointed  the  Son  of  mm, 
the  Incarnate  Word,  to  be  the  Giver  of  everlasting  life  to  man. 
It  is  an  ofl&ce  for  which  He  has  been  solemnly  set  apart  by  the 
Father. 

Parkhurst  thinks  that  the  word  means  "  Him  hath  God  the 
Father  authorized  with  sufficient  evidence,  particularly  by  the 
voice  from  heaven ;"  and  he  refers  the  sealing   entirely  to  the 


354  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

testimony  which  the  Father  had  borne  to  the  Son's  MessiaLship. 
This  also  is  Suicer's  view,  and  Alford's. 

Stier  remarks,  "  This  seahng  is  not  to  be  understood  merely  of 
miracles,  but  of  the  stamp  of  divinity  which  was  impressed  upon 
His  wliole  hfe  and  teaching."  This  is  Poole's  view,  and 
Hutcheson's. 

It  has  been  thought  by  some  that  there  is  a  tacit  reference 
here  to  the  history  of  Joseph ;  and  that  our  Lord  meant  that  aa 
Joseph  was  appointed  to  be  the  great  almoner  and  rehever  of 
the  Egyptians  by  the  king  of  Egypt,  so  He  is  appointed  by  the 
King  of  kings  to  reheve  the  spiritual  famine  of  mankind.  At 
any  rate  it  is  an  apt  and  suitable  illustration. 

The  idea  of  Hilary  and  some  others  that  the  expression 
"sealed"  refers  to  our  Lord  being  the  "express  image  of  the 
Father's  presence,"  appears  to  me  far-fetched  and  without  foun- 
dation. 

The  last  words  of  the  verse  should  be  rendered  more  literally, 
"  Him  hath  the  Father  sealed,  even  God."  It  almost  suggests 
the  idea  that  our  Lord  desired  to  prevent  His  hearers  supposing 
that  He  referred  to  Joseph  as  His  Father.  It  is  as  if  He  said, 
"  the  Father  I  mean,  remember,  is  not  an  earthly  father,  but 
God."  -^  ' 

Rollock  remarks  on  this  verse,  that  our  Lord  does  not  confine 
Himself  to  showing  the  folly  of  only  seeking  "  the  meat  that 
perisheth,"  but  is  careful  to  show  the  true  food  of  the  soul,  and 
to  point  out  who  alone  can  give  it.  He  observes  that  this  is 
an  example  to  us  in  teaching  man  the  Gospel.  The  remedy 
must  be  as  plainly  taught  and  hfted  up  as  the  disease.  He 
observes  truly  that  none  can  speak  better  of  the  vanity  of 
earthly  things  and  the  glory  of  heaven,  than  many  Papists  do. 
But  it  is  when  they  come  to  the  feeding  of  man's  soul  that 
they  fail.  They  try  to  feed  him  with  man's  merits,  the  inter- 
cession of  saints,  purgatory,  and  the  like,  and  do  not  show  him 
Christ. 

It  is  note-worthy  that  it  was  the  remembrance  of  this  verse 
which  made  Henry  Martyn  persevere  in  preaching  to  poor 
Hindoos  at  Dinapore  in  India.  He  had  found  they  only  came 
for  temporal  relief,  and  cared  nothing  for  his  preaching,  and 
he  was  on  the  point  of  giving  up  in  despair.  But  this  verse 
came  across  his  mind.  '•  If  the  Lord  Jesus  was  not  ashamed 
to  prear^h  to  mere  bread-seekers,"  he  thought,  "  who  am  I,  that 
I  should  give  over  in  disgust  ?" 


JOHN,    CHAP.   VI. 


355 


JOHN  YI.  28—34. 


28  Then  said  they  unto  him, 
What  shall  we  do,  that  "we  might 
work  the  works  of  Grod? 

29  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto 
them.  This  is  the  work  of  God,  that 
ye  believe  on  him  whom  he  hath 
Bent. 

30  They  said  therefore  unto  him, 
"What  sign  showest  thou  then,  that 
we  may  see,  and  beUeve  thee? 
what  dost  thou  work  ? 

31  Our  fathers  did  eat  manna  in 


the  desert;    as  it  is  wr.tten,   He 
gave  them  bread  from  heaven  to  eat. 

32  Then  Jesus  said  unto  them. 
Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you, 
Moses  gave  you  not  that  bread 
from  heaven ;  but  my  Father  giveth 
you  the  true  bread  from  heaven. 

33  For  the  bread  of  God  is  he 
which  Cometh  down  from  heaven, 
and  giveth  Hfe  unto  the  word. 

34  Then  said  they  unto  him, 
Lord,  evermore  give  us  this  bread. 


These  verses  form  the  beginning  of  one  of  the  most 
remarkable  passages  in  the  Gospels.  None,  perhaps,  of 
our  Lord's  discourses  has  occasioned  more  controversy, 
and  been  more  misunderstood,  than  that  which  we  find 
in  the  Sixth  Chapter  of  John. 

We  should  observe,  for  one  thing,  in  these  verses,  the 
spiritual  ignorance  and  vnhelief  of  the  natural  man. 
Twice  over  we  see  this  brought  out  and  exemplified. 
When  our  Lord  bade  his  hearers  "  labour  for  the  meat 
"which  endureth  to  eternal  life,"  they  immediately  began  to 
think  of  works  to  be  done,  and  a  goodness  of  their  own  to 
be  established.  "  What  shall  we  do  that  we  might  work 
the  works  of  God  ?"  Doing,  doing,  doing,  was  their  only 
idea  of  the  way  to  heaven. — Again,  when  our  Lord  spoke 
of  Himself  as  One  sent  of  God,  and  the  need  of  believing 
on  Him  at  once,  they  turn  round  with  the  question, — 
"  What  sign  showest  thou  ?  what  dost  thou  work  ?" 
Fresh  from  the  mighty  miracle  of  the  loaves  and  fishes,  one 
might  have  thought  they  had  had  a  sign  sufficient  to  con- 
vince them.  Taught  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself, 
one  might  have  expected  a  greater  readiness  to  believe. 
But  alas!  there  are  no  limits  to  man's  dulness,  prejudice, 
and  unbelief  in  spiritual  matters.  It  is  a  striking  fact  that 
the  only  thing  which  our  Lord  is  said  to  have  "marvelled" 


856  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

at  during  His  earthly  ministry,  was  man's  "unbelief." 
(Mark  vi.  6.) 

We  shall  do  well  to  i  emember  this,  if  we  ever  try  to  do 
good  to  others  in  the  matter  of  religion.  We  must  not  be 
cast  down  because  our  words  are  not  believed,  and  our 
efforts  seem  thrown  away.  We  must  not  complain  of  it 
as  a  strange  thing,  and  suppose  that  the  people  we  have  to 
deal  with  are  peculiarly  stubborn  and  hard.  We  must  re- 
collect that  this  is  the  very  cup  of  which  our  Lord  had  to 
drink,  and  like  Him  we  must  patiently  work  on.  If  even 
He,  so  perfect  and  so  plain  a  Teacher,  was  not  believed, 
what  right  have  we  to  wonder  if  men  do  not  believe  us  ? 
Happy  are  the  ministers,  and  missionaries,  and  teachers 
who  keep  these  things  in  mind !  It  will  save  them  much 
bitter  disappointment.  In  working  for  God,  it  is  of  first 
importance  to  understand  what  we  must  expect  in  man. 
Few  things  are  so  little  realized  as  the  extent  of  human 
unbelief. 

We  should  observe,  for  another  thing,  in  these  verses, 
the  high  honour  Christ  puts  on  faith  in  Himself.  The 
Jews  had  asked  Him, — "  What  shall  we  do,  that  we  might 
work  the  works  of  God  ?"  In  rejDly  He  says, — "  This  is 
the  work  of  God,  that  ye  believe  on  him  whom  he  hath 
sent."  A  truly  striking  and  remarkable  expression !  If 
any  two  things  are  put  in  strong  contrast,  in  the  N'ew 
Testament,  they  are  faith  and  works.  Not  working,  but 
believing, — not  of  works,  but  through  faith, — are  words 
familiar  to  all  careful  Bible-readers.  Yet  here  the  great 
Head  of  the  Church  declares  that  believing  on  Him  is  the 
highest  and  greatest  of  all  "  works  !  "  It  is  "  the  work  of 
God." 

Doubtless  our  Lord  did  not  mean  that  there  is  anything 
meritorioLis  in  believing.  Man's  faith,  at  the  very  best,  is 
feeble  and  defective.  Regarded  as  a  "work,"  it  cannot 
stand  the  severity  of  God's  judgment,  deserve  pardon,  or 


^JOHN,   CHAP.   VI.  357 

purchase  heaven.  Bui  jOur  Lord  did  mean  that  faith  in 
Himself,  as  the  onljr.jSayiour,  is  the  first  act  of  the  soul 
which  God  requires^J^t  A  sinner's  hands.  Till  a  man  believes 
on  Jesus,  and  rests  on  Je«us  as  a  lost  sinner,  he  is  nothing. 
— Our  Lord  did  mean  that  faith  in  Himself  is  that  act  of 
the  soul  which  specially  pleases  God.  When  the  Father 
sees  a  sinner  casting  aside  his  own  righteousness,  and 
simply  trusting  in  His  dear  Son,  He  is  well  pleased. 
Without  such  faith  it  is  impossible  to  please  God. — Our 
Lord  did  mean  that  faith  in  Himself  is  the  root  of  all  sav- 
ing religion.  There  is  no  life  in  a  man  till  he  believes. — 
Above  all,  our  Lord  did  mean  that  faith  in  Himself  is  the 
hardest  of  all  spiritual  acts  to  the  natural  man.  Did  the 
Jews  want  something  to  do  in  religion  ?  Let  them  know 
ihat  the  greatest  thing  they  had  to  do  was,  to  cast  aside 
their  pride,  confess  their  guilt  and  need,  and  humbly 
believe. 

Let  all  who  know  anything  of  true  faith  thank  God  and 
rejoice.  Blessed  are  they  that  believe !  It  is  an  attain- 
ment which  many  of  the  wise  of  this  world  have  never  yet 
reached.  We  may  feel  ourselves  poor,  weak  sinners.  But 
do  we  believe? — ^We  may  fail  and  come  short  in  many 
things.  But  do  we  believe  ? — He  that  has  learned  to  feel 
his  sins,  and  to  trust  Christ  as  a  Saviour,  has  learned  the 
two  hardest  and  greatest  lessons  in  Christianity.  He  has 
been  in  the  best  of  schools.  He  has  been  taught  by  the 
Holy  Ghost. 

We  shall  observe,  lastly,  in  these  verses,  the  far  greater 
privileges  of  Chrisfs  hearers  than  of  those  who  lived  in 
the  times  of  Moses.  Wonderful  and  miraculous  as  the 
manna  was  which  fell  from  heaven,  it  was  nothing  in  com- 
parison to  the  true  bread  which  Christ  had  to  bestow  on 
His  disciples.  He  himself  was  the  bread  of  God,  who  had 
come  down  from  heaven  to  give  life  to  the  world. — The 
bread  which  fell  in  the  days  of  Moses  could  only  feed  and 


358  EXPOSITORY  THOtJGHTS. 

satisfy  the  body.  The  Son  of  man  :^iad  come  to  feed  the 
soul. — The  bread  which  fell  in  the  (iij^tof  Moses  was  only 
for  the  benefit  of  Israel.  The  Son  of  'man  had  come  to 
offer  eternal  life  to  the  world. — ^Those  Who  ate  the  manna 
died  and  were  buried,  and  many  of  them  were  lost  for 
ever.  But  those  who  ate  the  bread  which  the  Son  of  man 
provided,  would  be  eternally  saved. 

And  now  let  us  take  heed  to  ourselves,  and  make  sure  " 
that  we  are  among  those  who  eat  the  bread  of  God  and 
live.  Let  us  not  be  content  with  lazy  waiting,  but  let 
us  actually  come  to  Christ,  and  eat  the  bread  of  life,  and 
believe  to  the  saving  of  our  souls.  The  Jews  could  say, 
— "  Evermore  give  us  this  bread."  But  it  may  be  feared 
they  went  no  further.  Let  us  never  rest  till,  by  faith,  we 
have  eaten  this  bread,  and  can  say,  "  Christ  is  mine.  I 
have  tasted  that  the  Lord  is  gracious.  I  know  and  feel 
that  I  am  His." 

ISToTES.     John  YI.  28—34. 

28. — [Then  said  they  unto  him.]  These  words  begin  one  of  the 
most  important  of  our  Lord's  discourses,  and  one  about  which 
the  widest  dififerences  of  opinion  prevail.  These  differences  it 
will  be  time  enough  to  consider,  when  we  come  to  the  passage 
out  of  which  they  arise.  In  the  mean  time  let  us  remember 
that  the  speakers  before  us  were  men  whom  our  Lord  had 
miraculously  fed  the  day  before,  and  on  whom  He  bad  just 
urged  the  paramount  importance  of  seeking  food  and  satisfaction 
for  their  souls.  For  anything  we  can  see  they  were  Jews  in  a 
state  of  great  spiiitual  ignorance  and  darkness.  Yet  even  with 
them  our  Lord  patiently  condescends  to  hold  a  long  conversation. 
Teachers  \vho  desire  to  walk  in  Christ's  steps  must  aim  at  thia 
kind  of  patienc?,  and  be  willing  to  talk  with  and  teach  the 
darkest  and  most  ignorant  men.  It  needs  wisdom,  iailh,  and 
patience. 

[What  shall  we  do...worhs  of  God?]  This  question  is  the 
language  of  men  who  were  someAvhat  aroused  and  impi-essed, 
but  still  totally  in  the  dark  about  the  way  to  heaven.  They 
feel  that  they  are  in  the  wrong  road,  and  that  they  ought  to  do 
some'.hing.  But  they  are  utterly  ignorant  what  to  do,  and  their 
only  notion  is  the  old  self-righteous  one  of  the  natural  man, — 


359 

"1  must  do  something,  I  must  perform  some  works  to  pler^se 
God  and  buy  admission  to  heaven." — This  seems  to  me  the 
leading  idea  of  the  question  before  us.  "Your  command  to 
labour  or  work  for  the  meat  that  endureth  pricks  our  conscience. 
AVe  admit  that  we  ought  to  do  something.  Tell  us  what  we 
must  do,  and  we  will  try  to  do  it." — It  is  a  case  of  a  conscience 
partially  aroused  and  put  on  its  defence,  groping  after  light.  It 
is  like  the  rich  young  man  who  came  running  to  our  Lord  and 
saying,  "What  good  thing  shall  I  do."  (Matt.  xix.  16.) 

The  expression  "  what  shall  we  do  ?  "  would  be  more  literally 
rendered,  "what  do  we?"  or  "what  must  we  do?"  or  "what 
are  we  to  do  ?" 

The  expression  "  that  we  might  wc>rk,"  might  have  been 
rendered  "  that  we  might  labour."  It  is  the  same  Greek  word 
that  is  translated  in  the  previous  verse  "labour."  The  expres- 
sion, "  the  works  of  God,"  cannot  of  course  mean  "  the  same 
works  thit  God  works."  It  means  "the  works  that  please  God, 
that  are  agreeable  to  God's  mind,  and  in  accordance  with  God's 
will."  Thus  1  Cor.  xv.  58,  and  xvi.  10.  This  is  the  view  of 
Glassius. 

This  question,  "what  shall  we  do?"  we  must  remember, 
ought  never  to  be  despised.  Though  it  may  often  be  the  lazy 
expression  of  languid  religious  feeling,  just  half  awakened,  it  is 
at  any  rate  much  better  than  having  no  feeling  at  all.  The 
worst  part  of  many  persons'  spiritual  condition  lies  heie,  that 
they  are  quite  indifferent  about  their  salvation;  they  never 
ask  "what  shall  we  do?" — Many  no  doubt  content  themselves 
with  saying  "what  shall  we  do?"  and  like  those  of  whom  we 
are  reading,  never  get  any  further.  But,  on  the  other  liand, 
in  many  cases,  "what  shall  I  do?"  is  the  beginning  of  eternal 
life,  the  first  step  toward  heaven,  the  first  breath  of  grace,  the 
first  spiritual  pulsation.  The  Jews  on  the  day  of  pentecost 
said,  "  what  must  we  do  ?"  Saul,  when  the  Lord  met  him  near 
Damascus,  said,  "  Lord,  what  wilt  thou  have  me  to  do  ?"  The 
Philippian  jailor  said,  "  What  must  I  do  to  be  saved  ?"  When- 
ever therefore  we  hear  a  person  ask  the  question  about  his  soul, 
"  what  shall  I  do  ?"  we  must  try  to  help  him  and  put  him  in 
the  right  way.  We  never  know  what  it  may  lead  to.  It  may 
perhaps  end  in  nothing,  and  prove  a  mere  temporary  feeling. 
But  it  may  also  come  to  something,  and  end  in  the  conversion 
of  a  soul. 

29. — {Jesus  ansivered.. .this. ...worJcMUeve... sent]  In  this  verse  our 
Lord  takes  hold  of  the  expression  used  by  the  Jews  about 
"  work,"  and  answers  them  according  to  their  state  of  mind, 
Did  they  ask  what  work  they  should  do  ?  Let  them  know  that 
the  first  thing  God  called  them  to  do,  was  to  believe  in  His  Son, 


360  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

the  Messiah  whom  He  had  sent,  and  whom  they  saw  before 
them. 

When  our  Lord  calls  faith  "  the  work  of  God,"  we  must  not 
suppose  He  means  here,  that  it  is  the  work  of  His  Spirit,  and 
His  gift.  This  is  undoubtedly  true,  but  not  the  truth  of  the  text. 
He  only  means  that  believing  is  ''  the  work  that  pleases  God," 
and  is  most  agreeable  to  God's  will  and  mind. 

Of  course  every  well-instructed  Bible-reader  will  remember, 
that,  strictly  speaking,  believing  is  so  far  from  being  a  "  work," 
that  it  is  the  very  opposite  of  workiag.  ''  To  him  that  worketh 
not,  but  believeth  on  Him  that  justifieth  the  ungodly,  his  faith  is 
counted  to  him  for  righteousness."  (Eom.  iv.  5.)  But  it  is  evi- 
dent that  our  Lord  accommodates  His  manner  of  speaking  to  the 
ignorant  minds  with  which  He  had  to  deal.  Thus  St.  Paul  calls 
the  doctrine  of  faith  the  ''  law  of  faith,"  (Eom.  iii.  27.)  It  is 
much  the  same  as  if  we  said  to  an  ignorant  but  awakened  inquirer 
after  salvation,  Avho  fancies  he  can  do  great  things  for  his  soul, — 
"  You  talk  of  doing.  But  know  that  the  first  thing  to  be  done, 
is  to  believe  on  Christ.  This  is  the  first  step  toward  heaven. 
You  have  done  nothing  until  you  believe.  This  is  the  thing  that 
pleases  God  most.  Without  faith  it  is  impossible  to  please 
Him.  This  is  the  hardest  thing  after  all.  Nothing  will  test 
the  reality  of  your  feelings  so  much  as  a  wilKngness  to  believe 
on  Christ,  and  cease  from  your  own  works.  Begin  therefore  by 
believing."  The  very  attempt  to  believe,  in  such  a  case,  might 
prove  useful. 

Let  us  note  in  this  verse  the  marvellous  wisdom  with  which 
our  Lord  suited  His  language  to  the  minds  of  those  He  spoke  to. 
It  should  be  the  constant  aim  of  a  religious  teacher,  not  merely 
to  teach  truth,  but  to  teach  truth  wisely  and  with  tact,  so  as  to 
arrest  the  attention  of  those  he  teaches.  Half  the  religious 
teaching  in  the  churches  and  schools  of  our  day,  is  entirely 
thrown  away  for  want  of  tact  and  power  of  adaptation  in  impart- 
ing it.  To  profess  truth  is  one  thing :  to  be  able  to  impart  it 
wisely,  quite  another. 

Let  us  note  in  this  verse  the  high  honour  our  Lord  puts  upon 
faith  in  Himself.  He  makes  it  the  root  of  all  religion,  the  foun- 
dation-stone of  His  kingdom,  the  very  first  step  toward  heave... 
Christians  sometimes  talk  ignorantly  about  faith  and  works,  ag 
if  they  were  things  that  could  be  compared  with  one  another  as 
equals,  or  opposed  to  one  another  as  enemies.  But  let  them 
observe  here  that  fiiitli  in  Christ  is  so  immeasurably  the  first 
tiling  in  Christianity,  that  in  a  certain  sense  it  is  the  great  work 
of  works.  In  a  certain  sense  it  is  the  seed  and  root  of  all  reli- 
gion, and  we  can  do  nothing  until  we  believe.  In  short  the 
right  answer  to  ''  what  must  1  do  ?"  is  "  believe.' 


361 

30. — {They  said  tlierefore  unto  him.]  The  secret  unbelief  of  the 
Jews  begins  to  come  out  in  this  verse.  Nothing  so  thoroughly 
reveals  the  hearts  of  men  as  a  summons  to  believe  on  Chri.^t. 
Exhortations  to  work  excite  no  prejudice  and  enmity.  It  is  the 
exhortation  to  believe  that  offends. 

[What  sign  showest  thou  then.]  The  word  "thou,"  in  this  sen- 
tence is^emphatic  in  the  Greek.  It  is  as  though  the  Jews  said, 
"  Who  art  thou  indeed  to  talk  in  this  way?"  "  What  miraculous 
evidence  of  thy  Messiahship  hast  thou  got  to  show  ?"  There  is 
an  evident  sneer  or  sarcasm  in  the  question. 

[That  we  may  see  and  believe  thee.]  This  seems  to  mean,  "  that 
we  may  see  in  the  miracle  wrought  unanswerable  proof  that 
Thou  art  the  Messiah,  and  seeing  the  miracle  may  thus  be  able 
to  believe  Thee."  This  is  the  common  language  of  many  uncon- 
verted hearts.  They  Avant  to  see  first,  and  then  to  believe.  But 
this  is  inverting  God's  order.  Faith  must  come  first,  and  sight 
will  follow. 

There  is  a  difference  that  ought  to  be  marked  between  the 
''believing  thee"  of  this  verse,  and  the  "believing  on  him  whom 
he  hath  sent,"  of  the  preceding  verse.  "Believing  on"  is  saving 
faith.  "  Believing  "  alone,  is  merely  believing  a  person  to  speak 
the  truth.  The  devils  "  believe  Christ,"  but  do  not  believe 
"  on  Christ."     We  beheve  John,  but  do  not  believe  "  on  him." 

f  What  dost  thou  worh]  It  seems  at  first  most  extraordinary 
that  men  who  had  seen  such  a  miracle  as  that  of  feeding  the  five 
thousand  with  five  loaves,  and  had  been  themselves  of  the  nuai- 
ber  fed,  and  this  only  tw^enty-four  hours  before,  could  ask  such  a 
question  as  this !  Our  first  thought  is,  that  no  greater  sign  or 
miracle  could  have  been  shown.  But  th^j  speak  as  if  it  was 
forgotten !  Surely  when  we  see  such  proofs  of  the  extreme  dul- 
ness  and  deadness  of  man's  heart,  we  have  no  reason  to  be  sur- 
prised at  what  we  see  among  professing  Christians. 

Bucer  and  Grotius  suggest,  that  the  speakers  here  can  hardly 
be  those  who  were  witnesses  of  the  miracle  of  feeding  the  five 
thousand.  But  I  see  no  need  for  the  suggestion,  when  we  look 
round  us  and  observe  what  human  nature  is  capable  of,  or  even 
look  at  the  book  of  Exodus,  and  see  how  soon  Israel  in  the  wil- 
derness forgot  the  miracles  they  had  seen. 

Let  us  remember  that  this  demand  for  "  a  sign,"  or  great  mira- 
cle, was  common  during  our  Lord's  ministry.  It  seems  to  have 
been  a  habit  of  mind  among  the  Jews.  St.  Paul  says,  "  The 
Jews  require  a  sign."  (1  Cor.  i.  22.)  They  were  always  deceiv- 
ing themselves  with  the  idea,  that  they  wanted  more  evidence, 
and  pretending  that  if  they  had  this  evidence  they  would  believe. 
Thousands  in  every  age  do  just  the  same.     They  five  on  waiting 

16 


362  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

for  something  to  convince  them,  and  fancying  that  if  they  were 
convinced,  they  would  be  different  men  in  reliorion.  The  plain 
truth  is,  that  it  is  want  of  heart,  not  want  of  evidence,  that  keeps 
people  back  from  Christ.  The  Jews  had  signs,  and  evidences, 
and  proofs  of  Christ's  Messiahship  in  abundance,  but  they  would 
not  see  them.  Just  so,  many  a  professed  unbeliever  of  our  day 
has  plenty  of  evidence  around  him,  but  he  will  neither  look  at  it 
nor  examine  it.  So  true  it  is  that  "  none  are  so  blind  as  those 
that  will  not  see." 

Quesnel  remarks,  "  The  atheist  is  still  seeking  after  proofs  of 
a  Deity,  though  he  walks  every  day  amidst  apparent  miracles." 

We  should  observe  that  the  Jews  were  willing  enough  to 
honour  Christ  as  "  a  prophet."  It  was  the  doctrine  of  faith  in 
Him  that  they  could  not  receive.  Christ  the  "teacher,"  is 
always  more  popular  than  Christ  the  "  sacrifice  and  substitute." 

31. — [Our  fathers... .manna....iuriUen.... to  eat]  The  intention  of  the 
Jews  in  saying  what  they  do  in  this  verse  is  plain.  They  evi- 
dently implied  a  disparaging  comparison  between  our  Lord  and 
Moses,  and  our  Lord's  miracle  of  feeding  the  multitude,  and  the 
feeding  of  Israel  with  manna.  It  is  as  though  they  said, 
"Although  Thou  didst  work  a  miracle  yesterday.  Thou  hast 
done  nothing  greater  than  the  thing  that  happened  in  the  days 
when  our  fathers  were  fed  with  manna  in  the  wilderness.  The 
sign  Thou  hast  given  is  not  so  great  a  sign  as  that  which  Moses 
gave  our  fathers  when  he  gave  them  bread  from  heaven  to  eat. 
Why  then  should  we  be  called  on  to  beheve  Thee  ?  What  proof 
have  we  that  Thou  art  a  prophet  greater  than  Moses  ?" 

The  word  "  manna  "  would  have  been  more  correctly  rendered 
"  the  manna,"  i.  e.,  "  the  well-known  and  famous  manna." 

Let  us  note  in  this  verse  how  prone  men  are  to  refer  back  at 
once  to  things  done  in  the  days  of  their  "  fathers,"  when  saving 
religion  is  pressed  home  on  their  consciences.  The  woman  of 
Samaria  began  talking  about  "our  father  Jacob." — "Art  thou 
greater  than  our  father  Jacob  ?"  (John  iv.  12.)  The  Pharisees 
"built  the  sepulchres  of  the  prophets."  (Luke  xi.  47.)  Dead 
teachers  have  always  more  authority  than  hving  ones. 

Let  U9  mark  that  the  miraculous  feeding  of  Israel  in  the  wil- 
derness with  manna  is  spoken  of  by  the  Jews  as  a  notorious 
historical  fact.  Our  Lord  moreover  in  the  following  verse  en- 
tirely assumes  the  truth  of  the  miracle.  The  modern  attempts 
to  deny  or  explain  away  the  miraculous  facts  recorded  in  tl^  Old 
Testament,  are  here,  as  well  as  elsewhere,  entirely  irreconcile- 
able  with  the  manner  in  which  they  are  always  spoken  of  in  the 
New  Testament.  He  that  denies  old  Testament  miracles,  is 
a&saulting  the  knowledge  and  veracity  of  Christ  and  the  Apos- 


JOHN,   CHAP.   VI.  363 

lies.     They  believed  them,  and  spoke  of  tnem,  as  historical  facts. 
We  never  need  be  ashamed  of  being  on  their  side. 

Let  us  observe  the  acquaintance  with  Scripture  which  the 
Jews  exhibit.  They  quote  the  seventy-eighth  Psalm  (ver.  24, 
25),  as  a  sujBQcient  proof  of  tfhe  fact  they  had  just  mentioned. 
A  certain  knowledge  of  Scripture,  unhappily,  may  often  be  found 
in  a  very  unbelieving  heart.  Knowledge  of  the  letter  of  Scrip- 
ture at  any  rate  seems  to  have  been  very  common  among  the 
Jews.  (See  Deut.  vi.  6,  7.) 

Whether  or  not  they  apphed  the  sentence  they  quoted  to 
Moses,  rather  than  God,  1  think,  admits  of  a  question.  Our 
Lord's  words,  in  the  following  verse,  would  rather  lead  one  to 
think  that  they  meant  that  "Moses  gave  them  bread  from 
heaven." 

32. — l^Then  Jesns....verily.. ..Moses  gave  you  not  that  hreadi]  The 
object  of  our  Lord  in  this  verse  is  very  plain.  He  replies  to 
the  argument  of  the  Jews,  that  the  miracle  of  the  manna  was 
a  greater  miracle  than  any  He  had  come  into  the  world  to  work, 
and  that  Moses  w^as  consequently  a  greater  prophet  than  He  was. 
Yet  in  the  words  he  uses,  it  is  not  very  easy  to  settle  where  the 
stress  should  be  laid,  and  what  is  the  precise  word  on  which  the 
point  of  the  answer  rests. 

(a.)  Some  think  that  it  means, — "  It  was  not  Moses  who  gave 
you  the  bread  from  heaven,  but  God."  They  lay  the  stress  on 
Moses. 

(b.)  Some  think  that  it  means, — "Moses  did  not  give  you 
bread  from  the  real  heaven  of  heavens,  where  God  the  Father 
dwells,  but  only  a  material  food  from  the  upper  part  of  that 
atmosphere  which  surrounds  this  earth."  They  lay  the  stress 
on  heaven. 

(c.)  Some  think  that  it  means, — ''  Moses  did  not  give  the  true 
spiritual  bread  from  heaven,  though  he  gave  you  bread."  They 
lay  the  stress  on  "  that  bread." 

The  second  of  these  opinions  seems  to  me  quite  inadmissible. 
The  distinction  between  the  heaven  where  God  dwells  and  the 
upper  region  of  our  atmosphere  was  not,  I  beheve,  in  our  Lord's 
mind,  when  He  used  the  language  He  uses  here.  Moreover  it 
cannot  be  denied  that  the  manna,  though  only  material  food, 
was  heavenly  food,  i.  e.,  food  supplied  by  God's  miraculous  inter- 
position. 

The  true  view  seems  to  me  to  be  contained  in  the  first  and 
third  opinions  taken  together.  The  Greek  bears  it  out  by  put- 
ting the  word  " not"  in  the  very  forefront  of  the  sentence.  "It 
was  not  Moses  who  gave  you  that  bread  from  heaven,  and  even 


J 

1 


864  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

the  bread  that  was  given  you  was  not  that  true  bread  which 
endures  to  everlasting  hfe." 

[Bui  my  Father  giveth  you  the  true  hread  from  heaven.']  The 
use  of  the  present  tense  should  be  noticed  in  this  sentence.  The 
idea  seems  to  be,  ''  What  Moses  could  not  give  you,  even  the 
true  bread  which  feeds  the  soul,  my  Father  does  givTi  you, 
and  is  actually  giving  you  at  this  moment,  in  that  He  gives  yoi: 
myself." 

The  expression,  "  giveth  you,"  must  not  be  supposed  to  im^' 
ply  actual  reception  on  the  part  of  the  Jews.  It  rather  means 
"giving"  in  the  sense  of  "offering"  for  acceptance  a  thing 
which  those  to  whom  it  is  offered  may  not  receive. — It  is  a  very 
remarkable  saying,  and  one  of  those  which  seems  to  me  to  prove 
unanswerably  that  Christ  is  Grod's  gift  to  the  whole  world, — that 
His  redemption  was  made  for  all  mankind, — that  He  died  for  all, 
— and  is  offered  to  all.  It  is  like  the  famous  texts,  "  God  so 
loved  the  world  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son  "  (John  iii. 
16)  ;  and,  "'  God  hath  given  to  us  eternal  life,  and  this  life  is  in 
his  Son."  (1  John  v.  11.)  It  is  a  gift  no  doubt  which  is  utterly 
thrown  away,  like  many  other  gifts  of  God  to  man,  and  is  profit- 
able to  none  but  those  that  beheve.  But  that  God  nevertheless 
does  in  a  certain  sense  actually  "  give  "  His  Son,  as  the  true  bread 
from  heaven,  even  to  the  wicked  and  unbelieving,  appears  to  me 
incontrovertibly  proved  by  the  words  before  us.  It  is  a  remark- 
able fact  that  Erskine,  the  famous  Scotch  seceder,  based  his  right 
to  offer  Christ  to  all,  on  these  very  words,  and  defended  himself 
before  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Kirk  of  Scotland  on  the 
strength  of  them.  He  asked  the  Moderator  to  tell  him  what 
Christ  meant  when  He  said,  "  My  Father  giveth  you  the  true 
bread  from  heaven," — and*  got  no  answer.  The  truth  is,  I  ven- 
ture to  think,  that  the  text  cannot  be  answered  by  the  advocates 
of  an  extreme  view  of  particular  redemption.  Fairly  inter- 
preted, the  words  mean  that  in  some  sense  or  another  the  Father 
does  actually  "  give  "  the  Son  to  those  who  are  not  believers. 
They  warrant  preachers  and  teachers  in  making  a  wide,  broad, 
full,  free,  unlimited  offer  >f  Christ  to  all  mankind  without  ex- 
ception. 

Even  Hutcheson,  the  Scotch  divine,  though  a  strong  advocate 
of  particular  redemption,  remai-ks, — "  Even  such  as  are,  at  pre- 
sent, but  carnal  and  unsound,  are  not  secluded  from  the  offer  of 
Christ ;  but  upon  right  terms  may  expect  that  He  will  be  gifted 
to  them." 

The  expression  "  true,"  in  this  place,  when  applied  to  bread, 
means  "  true  "  as  opposed  to  that  which  is  only  typical,  emble- 
matical, and  temporal.  The  manna  was  undoubtedly  real  true 
food  for  tl  e  body.     But  it  was  a  type  of  a  iar  better  food,  and 


JOHN,    CHAP.    VI.  365 

was  itself  a  thing  which  could  not  bene£t  the  soul.  Christ  waa 
the  true  spiritual  food  of  which  the  manna  was  the  type.  Ex- 
amples of  "  true  "  in  this  sense  may  be  seen  in  John  i.  9 ;  xv.  1 ; 
Heb.  viii.  2  ;  ix.  24. 

33. — [The  hreacl  of  God  is  that,  etc.]  At  first  sigiit,  this  verse  seems 
to  mean,  that  ''  Ciirist  coming  down  from  heaven,  and  giving  life 
unto  the  world,  is  the  true  bread  of  God, — the  Divine  food  of 
man's  soul."  But  it  may  well  be  doubted  whether  this  is  the 
precise  meaning  of  tlie  Greek  words.  I  thin]?:  with  Rollock, 
Bengel,  Scholefield,  Alford,  and  others,  they  would  be  more  cor- 
rectly rendered, — "  The  bread  of  God  is  that  bread  which  cometh 
down  from  heaven." 

(a.)  For  one  thing,  the  Jews  do  not  appear  to  have  under- 
stood our  Lord  as  yet  to  speak  directly  of  Himself,  or  of  any 
person.  Else  why  should  they  have  said, — "  Lord,  give  us  this 
bread."  Moreover,  they  did  not  CQurmur,  when  they  heard  these 
words. 

(&.)  For  anoth-er  thing,  our  Lord  does  not  appear  as  yet  to  re- 
veal fully  that  He  was  the  bread  of  God.  He  reserves  this  till 
the  thirty-fifth  verse,  and  then  declares  it.  At  present  He  only 
gives  a  general  intimation  of  a  certain  Divine  fife-giving  bread. 

(c.)  For  another  thing,  it  is  more  in  keeping  with  the  gradual 
unfolding  of  truth, — which  appears  so  strikingly  in  this  chapter, 
— to  suppose  that  our  Lord  begins  with  a  general  statement,  than 
to  suppose  that  He  speaks  at  once  of  Himself  personally.  First, 
(1.)  the  bread  generally, — then,  (2.)  I  am  the  bread, — then,  (3.) 
the  bread  is  My  flesh, — then,  (4.)  except  ye  eat  the  flesh,  and 
drink  the  blood,  no  life,  etc.,— such  seem  the  gradual  steps  by 
which  our  Lord  leads  on  His  hearers  in  this  wonderful  chapter. 
I  freely  admit  that  the  point  is  doubtful.  Happily,  whether  we 
read,  *^  the  bread  of  God  is  He,"  or  "  the  bread  of  God  iis  that 
bread,"  the  doctrine  is  sound,  and  Scriptural,  and  edifying. 

The  expression,  "  the  bread  of  God,"  seems  equivalent  to  the 
expression  of  the  preceding  verse,  "the  true  bread."  It  is  that 
real  satisfying  food  for  the  soul  which  God  has  provided. 

The  expression,  which  "  cometh  down  from  heaven,"  is  an  as- 
sertion of  the  Divine  origin  of  that  spiritual  food  which  God  had 
provided.  Like  the  manna,  it  came  down  from  heaven,  but  in  a 
iar  higher,  fuller,  and  deeper  sense,  than  the  manna  did.  It  waa 
''  that  personal  bread,"  of  which  they  would  soon  hear  more  dis- 
tinctly. 

The  expression,  "  giveth  fife  to  the  world  "  implies  a  contrast 
between  the  "bread  of  God,"  and  the  manna.  The  manna  only 
supplied  the  hunger  of  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel, — viz.,  600,000 
men  and  their  families.     The  bread  of  God  was  for  the  whole 


366  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

world,  and  provided  eternal  life  for  every  member  of  Adaiil*a 
family  who  would  eat  of  it,  whether  Jew  or  Gentile. 

We  should  mark,  again,  what  a  strong  argumenf  these  worda 
supply  in  favour  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ  being  God's  gift  to  alL 
That  all  the  world  has  not  life  from  Christ,  and  does  not  believe 
in  Him,  is  undoubtedly  true.  But  that  life  is  provided  in  Christ, 
and  salvation  sufiBcient  for  all  the  world,  appears  to  be  the  natu- 
ral interpretation  of  the  text. 
♦ 
24, — [Then  said  they. ..Lord... give  us  this  bread.]  There  is  a  striking 
resemblance  between  the  thought  expressed  in  this  verse,  and 
the  thought  of  the  Samaritan  woman,  when  she  heard  of  the 
living  water  that  Christ  could  give  : — "  Sir,  give  me  this  water, 
that  I  thirst  not,  neither  conae  hither  to  draw."  (John  iv.  15.)  In 
both  cases  we  see  desire  called  forth  and  excited  by  our  Lord's 
words.  There  is  a  vague  sense  of  something  great  and  good 
being  close  at  hand,  and  a  vague  wish  expressed  to  have  it.  In 
the  case  of  the  Samaritan  woman,  the  wish  proved  the  first 
spark  in  a  thorough  conversion  to  God.  In  the  case  of  the  Jews 
before  us,  the  wish  seems  to  have  been  nothing  more  than  the 
"  desire  of  the  slothful,"  and  to  have  gone  no  further.  Wishing 
and  admiring  are  not  conversion. 

Let  us  note,  carefully,  that  there  is  nothing  hitherto  to  show 
that  the  Jews  understood  our  Lord  to  call  Simself  the  "bread  of 
God,"  or  "  the  true  bread."  That  there  was  such  a  thing  as  the 
true  and  satisfying  bread, — that  it  must  be  the  same  as  that 
*'  meat  which  endureth  to  everlasting  life,"  they  seem  to  have 
concluded; — and  that  it  was  something  which  our  Lord  could 
give,  they  inferred.  But  there  is  not  a  word  to  make  us  think 
they  saw  it  at  present  to  mean  Christ  himself  This  is  a  weighty 
argument  in  favour  of  that  view  of  the  preceding  verse  which  I 
have  tried  to  support,  viz., — that  it  ought  to  be  translated  "  the 
bread  of  God  is  that  bread,"  not  "  He." 

There  is  some  probabihty  in  Lightfoot's  remark,  that  our  Lord's 
hearers,  like  most  Jews,  had  their  minds  stuffed  with  foolish  and 
superstitious  notions  about  great  banquets  and  feasts,  which 
they  expected  Messiah  to  give  them,  whenever  He  appeared. 
They  had  a  tradition  that  Leviathan  and  Behemoth  were  to  be 
slain,  and  their  flesh  made  into  a  great  feast  for  Israel  when 
Mtssiah  came.  Our  Lord,  possibly,  had  this  tradition  in  His 
mind,  and  desired  to  turn  the  minds  of  the  Jews  to  the  true  food 
vhich  Messiah  had  come  to  give. 


JOHN.    CHAP.   VI.  367 


JOHN  VI.  35—40. 


35  And  J  3SUS  said  unto  them,  I 
am  the  bread  of  life :  he  that  cometh 
to  me  shall  never  hunger ;  and  he 
that  beheveth  on  me  shall  never 
thirst. 

36  But  I  said  unto  you,  That  ye 
also  have  seen  me,  and  believe  not. 

37  All  that  the  Father  giveth  me 
shall  come  to  me;  and  him  that 
cometh  to  me  I  will  in  no  wise  cast 
out. 

38  Por  I  came  down  from  heaven, 


not  to  do  mine  own  will,  but  the 
will  of  liim  that  sent  me. 

39  And  this  is  the  Father's  will 
which  hath  sent  me,  that  of  all 
which  he  hath  given  me  I  should 
lose  nothing,  but  should  raise  it  up 
again  at  the  last  day. 

40  And  this^is  the  will  of  him 
that  sent  me,  that  every  one  which 
seeth  the  Son,  and  beheveth  on  him, 
may  have  everlasting  life:  and  I 
will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day. 


Three  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ's  great  sayings  are 
strung  together,  like  pearls,  in  this  passage.  Each  of  them 
ought  to  be  precious  to  every  true  Christian.  All  taken 
together,  they  form  a  mine  of  truth,  into  which  he  that 
searches  need  never  search  in  vain. 

We  have,  first,  in  these  verses,  a  saying  of  Christ  about 
Himself.  We  read  that  Jesus  said, — "  I  am  the  bread  of 
life  :  he  that  cometh  to  me  shall  never  hunger,  and  he  that 
believeth  on  me  shall  never  thirst." 

Our  Lord  would  have  us  know  that  He  himself  is  the 
appointed  food  of  man's  soul.  The  soul  of  every  man  is 
naturally  starving  and  famishing  through  sin.  Christ  is 
given  by  God  the  Father,  to  be  the  Satisfier,  the  Reliever, 
and  the  Physician  of  man's  spiritual  need.  In  Him  and 
His  mediatorial  office, — in  Him  and  His  atoning  death, — 
in  Him  and  His  priesthood, — in  Him  and  His  grace,  love, 
and  power, — in  Him  alone  will  empty  souls  find  their 
wants  supplied.  In  Him  there  is  life.  He  is  "  the  bread 
of  life." 

With  what  divine  and  perfect  wisdom  this  name  ia 
chosen  !  Bread  is  necessary  food.  We  can  manage  tole- 
rably well  without  many  things  on  our  table,  but  not  with- 
out bread.  So  is  it  with  Christ.  We  must  have  Christ, 
or  die  in  our  own  sins. — Bread  is  food  that  suits  all.  Some 
cannot  eat  meat,  and  some  cannot  eat  vegetables.    But  all 


368  EXPOSITOKY  THOUGHTS. 

like  bread.  It  is  food  both  for  the  Queen  and  the  paujier. 
So  is  it  with  Christ.  He  is  just  the  Saviour  that  meets  the 
wants  of  every  class. — Bread  is  food  that  we  need  daily. 
Other  kinds  of  food  we  take,  perhaps,  only  occasionally. 
But  we  want  bread  every  morning  and  evening  in  our  lives. 
So  is  it  with  Christ.  There  is  no  day  in  our  lives  but  w^e 
need  His  blood.  His  righteousness,  His  intercession,  and 
His  grace. — Well  may  He  be  called,  "  The  bread  of  life !" 

Do  we  know  anything  of  spiritual  hunger?  Do  we 
feel  anything  of  craving  and  emptiness  in  conscience, 
heart,  and  affections  ?  Let  us  distinctly  understand  that 
Christ  alone  can  relieve  and  supply  us,  and  that  it  is  His 
office  to  relieve.  We  must  come  to  Him  by  faith.  We 
must  believe  on  Him,  and  commit  our  souls  into  His 
hands.  So  coming.  He  pledges  His  royal  word  we  shall 
find  lasting  satisfaction  both  for  time  and  eternity. — It  is 
Avritten, — "  He  that  cometh  unto  me  shall  never  hunger, 
and  he  that  believeth  on  me  shall  never  thirst." 

We  have,  secondly,  in  these  verses,  a  saying  of  Christ 
about  those  loho  come  to  Him.  We  read  that  Jesus  said, 
— "  Hira  that  cometh  to  me  I  will  in  nowise  cast  out." 

What  does  "coming"  mean?  It  means  that  movement 
of  the  soul  which  takes  place  when  a  man,  feeling  his 
sins,  and  finding  out  that  he  cannot  save  himself,  hears 
of  Christ,  applies  to  Christ,  trusts  in  Christ,  lays  hold  on 
Christ,  and  leans  all  his  weight  on  Christ  for  salvation. 
When  this  happens,  a  man  is  said,  in  Scripture  language, 
to  "  come"  to  Christ. 

What  did  our  Lord  mean  by  saying, — "  I  will  in  no- 
wise cast  him  out"?  He  meant  that  He  will  not  refuse 
to  save  any  on6  who  comes  to  Hira,  no  matter  what  he 
may  have  been.  His  past  sins  may  have  been  very 
great.  His  present  weakness  and  infirmity  may  be  very 
great.  But  does  he  come  to  Christ  by  faith  ?  Then 
Christ   ^^'ill   receive  him    graciously,   pardon   him   freely, 


JOHN,    CHAP.   VI.  869 

place  him  in  the  number  of  His  dear  children,  and  give 
him  everlasting  life. 

These  are  golden  words  indeed !  They  have  smoothed 
down  many  a  dying  pillow,  and  calmed  many  a  troubled 
conscience.  Let  them  sink  down  deeply  into  our  memo- 
ries, and  abide  there  continually.  A  day  w^ill  come  when 
flesh  and  heart  shall  fail,  and  the  world  can  help  us  no 
more.  Happy  shall  we  be  in  that  day,  if  the  Spirit  wit- 
nesses with  our  spirit  that  we  have  really  come  to  Christ ! 

We  have,  lastly,  in  these  verses,  a  saying  of  Christ 
about  the  will  of  Sis  Father.  Twice  over  come  the 
solemn  words, — "This  is  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me." 
Once  we  are  told  it  is  His  will,  "  that  every  one  that  seeth 
the  Son  may  have  everlasting  life."  Once  we  are  told  it 
is  His  will  that,  "  of  all  which  he  hath  given  to  Christ  he 
shall  lose  nothing." 

We  are  taught  by  these  words  that  Christ  has  brought 
into  the  world  a  salvation  open  and  free  to  every  one. 
Our  Lord  draws  a  picture  of  it,  from  the  story  of  the 
brazen  serpent,  by  which  bitten  Israelites  in  the  wilder-, 
ness  were  healed.  Every  one  that  chose  to  "  look  "  at  the 
brazen  serpent  might  live.  Just  in  the  same  w^ay,  every 
one  who  desires  eternal  life  may  "look"  at  Christ  by 
faith,  and  have  it  freely.  There  is  no  barrier,  no  limit,  no 
restriction.  The  terms  of  the  Gospel  are  wide  and  simple. 
Every  one  may  "  look  and  live." 

We  are  taught,  furthermore,  that  Christ  will  never 
allow  any  soul  that  is  committed  to  Him  to  be  lost  and 
cast  away.  He  will  keep  it  safe,  from  grace  to  glory,  in 
epite  of  the  world,  the  flesh,  and  the  devil.  Not  one 
bone  of  His  mystical  body  shall  ever  be  broken.  "tsTot 
one  lamb  of  His  flock  shall  ever  be  left  behind  in  the 
wilderness.  He  will  raise  to  glory,  in  the  last  day,  the 
whole  flock  entrusted  to  His  charge,  and  not  one  shall  be 
found  missing. 

16* 


370  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Let  the  true  Christian  feed  on  the  truths  contained  in 
this  passage,  and  thank  God  for  them.  Christ  the  Bread 
of  life, — Christ  the  Receiver  of  all  who  come  to  Him, — 
Christ  the  Preserver  of  all  believers, — Christ  is  for  every 
man  who  is  willing  to  believe  on  Him,  and  Christ  is  the 
eternal  possession  of  all  who  so  believe.  Surely  this  is 
glad  tidings  and  good  news! 

Notes.     John  VI.  35 — 40. 

35. — [Jesus  said...!  am  the  bread  of  life.]  In  this  verse  our  Lord 
begins  to  speak  in  the  first  person.  Henceforth  in  this  discourse 
we  hear  directly  of  "  I "  and  "  Me  "  no  less  than  thirty-five  times. 
He  drops  aU  further  reserve  as  to  His  meaning,  and  tells  the 
Jews  plainly,  "  I  am  the  bread  of  life," — the  true  bread  from 
heaven, — the  bread  of  God  which,  coming  down  from  heaven, 
giveth  life  to  the  world. 

The  "  bread  of  life  "  means  that  spiritual  bread  which  conveys 
hfe  to  the  soul, — that  living  bread  which  does  not  merely  feed  the 
body,  like  common  bread,  but  supplies  eternal  sustenance  and 
nourishment  to  the  eternal  soul.  It  is  like  "the  water  of  life" 
(Rev.  xxii.  17),  and  "  hving  water."  (John  iv.  10.) 

The  reasons  why  Christ  calls  Himself  "  bread,"  appear  to  be 
such  as  these.  He  is  intended  to  be  to  the  soul  what  bread  is 
to  the  body, — its  food. — Bread  is  necessary  food :  when  men  can 
afford  to  eat  nothing  else,  they  eat  bread. — It  is  food  that  all 
need :  the  king  and  the  pauper  both  eat  bread. — It  is  food  that 
suits  all :  old  and  young,  weak  and  strong,  all  like  bread, — It  is 
the  most  nourishing  kind  of  food:  nothing  does  so  much  good, 
and  is  so  indispensable  to  bodily  health,  as  bread. — It  is  food 
that  we  need  daily  and  are  never  tired  of:  morning  and  night 
we  go  on  all  our  lives  eating  bread. — The  application  of  these 
various  points  to  Christ  is  too  plain  to  need  any  explanation. 

One  great  general  lesson  is  doubtless  intended  to  be  drawn 
from  Christ's  selection  of  "bread"  as  an  emblem  of  Himself. 
He  is  given  to  be  the  great  supply  of  all  the  wants  of  men's 
souls,  "\yhatever  our  spiritual  necessity  may  be,  however  starv- 
ing, famished,  weak,  and  desperate  our  condition,  there  is  enough 
in  Christ,  and  to  spare. — He  is  "  bread." 

Bollock  remarks,  that  as  soon  as  the  slightest  spiritual  desire 
is  manifested  by  any  one,  however  ignorant  and  weak,  he  should 
be  at  once  directed  to  Christ.  It  is  what  our  Lord  himself  did. 
As  scon  as  the  Jews  said, — "Lord,  evermore  give  us  this  bread," 


371 

He  cried, — "  I  am  the  bread  of  life."     He  never  "  quenched  the 
smoking  flax." 

[He  that  Cometh... hunger. ..helieveth... thirst]  The  words  "coming" 
and  "  beheving"  in  this  sentence,  appear  to  mean  very  nearly  one 
and  the  same  thing.  To  "come"  to  Christ  is  to  "beheve"  on 
Him,  and  to  "  believe  "  on  Him  is  to  "  come"  to  Him, — both  ex- 
pressions mean  that  act  of  the  soul  whereby,  under  a  sense  of  its 
sins  and  necessity,  it  apphes  to  Christj  lays  hold  on  Christ,  trusts 
itself  to  Christ,  casts  itself  on  Christ. — "  Coming,"  is  the  soufs 
movement  towards  Christ.  "  Believing,"  is  the  soul's  venture  on 
Christ. — If  there  is  any  difference,  it  is  that  "coming"  is  the  first 
act  of  the  soul  when  it  is  taught  by  the  Holy  Q-host,  and  that 
"believing"  is  a  continued  act  or  habit  which  never  ends.  No 
man  "comes"  who  does  not  believe;  and  all  who  come  go  on 
believing. 

When  our  Lord  says  "  shall  never  hunger,"  and  "  shall  never 
thirst,"  He  does  not  mean  that  a  believer  on  Christ  shall  no  longer 
feel  any  want,  or  emptiness,  or  deficiency  within  him.  This 
would  not  be  correct.  The  best  of  believers  will  often  cry,  like 
Sr.  Paul,  "  Oh,  wretched  man  that  I  am!"  (Rom.  vii.  24.)  The 
man  who  "hungers  and  thirsts  after  righteousness,"  is  blessed. 
(Matt.  V.  6.) — What  our  Lord  does  mean  is,  that  faith  in  Christ 
shall  supply  a  man's  soul  with  a  peace  and  satisfaction  that  shall 
never  be  entirely  taken  from  him, — that  shall  endure  for  ever. 
The  man  who  eats  and  drinks  material  food  shall  soon  be  hungry 
and  thirsty  as  ever.  But  the  man  who  comes  to  Christ  by  faith, 
gets  hold  of  something  that  is  an  everlasting  possession.  He 
shall  never  die  of  spiritual  famine,  and  perish  for  want  of  soul 
nouri^ment.  He  may  have  his  low  feelings  at  seasons.  He 
may  even  lose  his  sense  of  pardon,  and  his  enjoyment  of  rehgion 
But  once  in  Christ  by  faith,  he  shall  never  be  cast  away  and 
starved  in  hell.    He  shall  never  die  in  his  sins. 

(a.)  Let  us  note  in  this  verse  how  simple  are  the  figures  by 
which  our  Lord  brings  His  own  sufficiency  within  the  reach  of 
man's  understanding.  He  calls  himself  "bread."  It  was  an  idea 
that  even  the  poorest  hearer  could  understand.  He  that  would 
do  good  to  the  poor,  need  never  be  ashamed  of  using  the  simplest 
and  most  familiar  illustrations. 

(6.)  Let  us  note  that  faith  is  a  movement  of  the  soul.  Its  first 
action  is  "coming  to  Christ."  Its  subsequent  life  is  a  constant 
daily  repetition  of  its  first  action.  To  tell  people  to  "  sit  still  and 
wait,"  is  poor  theology.     We  should  bid  them  arise  and  come. 

(c.)  Let  us  note  that  coming  to  Christ  is  the  true  secret  of 
obtaining  soul  satisfaction  and  inward  peace.  Until  we  take  that 
step  oiu'  consciences  are  never  easy.  We  "  hunger  and  thirst," 
and  find  no  relief. 


372  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

(d.)  Le:  UF!  note  that  true  believers  sliall  never  be  altogether 
cast  off  and  forsaken  of  God.  The  man  that  comes  to  Christ 
shall  "  never  hunger  nor  thirst."  The  text  is  one  among  many 
proofs  of  the  perseverance  of  the  saints. 

(e.)  Let  us  note,  finally,  liow  simple  are  the  terms  of  the 
Go.-^pel.  It  is  but  coming  and  believing  that  Christ  asks  at  oui 
hands.  The  most  ignorant,  the  most  sinful,  the  most  hardened, 
need  not  despair.     They  have  but  to  "  come  and  believe." 

Luther,  quoted  by  Besser,  remarks  on  this  verse: — "These 
are  indeed  dear  and  precious  words,  which  it  is  not  enough  for 
us  merely  to  know.  We  must  turn  them  to  account,  and  say, 
Upon  these  words  I  will  go  to  sleep  at  night  and  get  up  in  the 
morning ;  leaning  upon  them  will  I  sleep  and  wake,  and  work 
and  trav\?l.  For  though  everything  were  to  go  to  ruin,  and 
though  father  and  mother,  emperor  and  pope,  princes  and  lords, 
all  forsook  nie,  though  even  Moses  could  not  help  me,  and  I  had 
only  Christ  to  look  to,  yet  He  will  help  me.  For  His  words  are 
sure,  and  He  says  '  Hold  fast  by  me :  come  thou  to  me,  and  thou 
shalt  live.'  The  meaning  of  these  words  is,  that  whoever  can 
believe  on  that  one  Man  who  is  called  Jesus  Christ,  shall  be 
satisfied,  and  cannot  suffer  either  hunger  or  thirst." 

3G. —  [But  I  said.. ..ye  also  have  seen  Me  and  leJieve  not]  It  is  not 
quite  clear  to  what  our  Lord  refers  in  this  verse,  when  He  says, 
— "  I  said."  Some  think  that  He  is  referring  specially  to  His 
own  words  in  the  26th  verse, — "  Ye  seek  me,  not  because  ye 
saw  the  miracles,"  etc.  Others  think  that  He  refers  generally 
to  the  testimony  He  had  frequently  borne  against  the  unbe'ief 
of  the  Jewish  people,  in  almost  every  [)lace  where  He  preached. 

It  seems  to  me  most  natural  to  connect  the  verse  with  the 
saying  of  the  Jews,  in  the  30th  verse.  They  had  there  said, — 
"  What  sign  showest  thou  then,  that  we  may  see  and  believe 
thoe?"  Why  should  we  not  suppose  our  Lord  in  this  verse  to 
take  up  that  saying  and  reply, — "  You  talk  of  seeing  and  believ- 
ing ;  I  tell  you  again,  and  have  long  told  you,  that  ye  have  seen 
me,  and  yet  do  not  beheve  "  ? 

The  connecting  link  with  the  preceding  verse,  appears  to  be 
something  of  this  kind: — "I  am  quite  aware  that  I  speak  in 
vain  to  many  of  you  of  the  bread  of  life  and  of  believing.  For 
I  have  said  often,  and  now  say  it  again,  that  many  of  yon  have 
both  seen  me  and  my  miracles,  and  yet  do  not  believe.  Never- 
theless, I  am  not  discouraged.  I  know,  in  spite  of  your  unbe- 
lief, that  some  will  be  saved." 

The  unbelief  of  human  nature  is  painfully  exhibited  in  thia 
verse.  Some  could  even  see  and  hear  Christ  liimself,  while  Ho 
was  on  earth,  and  yet  remain  unbelieving  I     Surely  we  have  no 


VI.  373 

right  to  be  surprised  if  we  find  like  unbelief  now.     Men  may 
actually  see  Christ  with  their  bodily  eyes  and  have  no  faith. 

37.— [All  that  the  Father  giveth  me  shall  come  to  me.]  The  con- 
nection of  this  verse  with  the  preceding  one  seems  to  be  this : 
"  Your  unbelief  does  not  move  me  or  surprise  me.  I  foresaw  it, 
and  have  been  aware  of  it.  Nevertheless,  your  unbelief  will 
not  prevent  God's  purposes  taking  eflfect.  Some  will  believe 
though  you  remain  unbelieving.  Everything  that  the  Father 
gives  me  will  come  unto  me  in  due  time;  believe,  and  be  saved. 
In  spite  of  your  unbelief,  all  my  sheep  shall  sooner  or  later  come 
to  me  by  faith,  and  be  gathered  within  my  fold.  I  see  your 
unbelief  with  sorrow,  but  not  with  anxiety  and  surprise.  I  am 
prepared  for  it.  I  know  that  you  cannot  alter  God's  purposes: 
and  in  accordance  with  those  purposes,  a  people  will  come  to 
me,  though  you  do  not." 

Luther,  quoted  by  Besser,  supposes  our  Lord  to  say,  "This 
sei'mon  shall  not  on  your  account  be  of  none  effect,  and  remain 
without  fruit.  If  you  will  not,  another  will;  if  you  do  not 
believe,  yet  another  does." 

The  English  language  fails  to  give  the  full  sense  of  the  Greek 
in  this  sentence.  The  literal  meaning  of  the  Greek  is,  not  "  all 
persons  whom  the  Father  giveth  shall  come,"  but  "  everything, 
— the  whole  thing."  It  is  not  a  masculine  plural,  but  a  neuter 
singular.  The  idea  is  either  "  that  whole  mystical  body,  the 
company  of  my  believing  people,  shall  come  to  me,"  or  else 
"  every  single  part  or  jot  or  member  of  my  mystical  body  shall 
come  to  me,  and  not  one  be  found  missing  at  last," 

"We  learn  from  these  words  the  great  and  deep  truth  of  God's 
election  and  appointment  to  eternal  life  of  a  people  out  of  this 
world.  The  Father  from  all  eternity  has  given  to  the  Son  a 
people  to  be  His  own  peculiar  people.  The  saints  are  given  to 
Christ  by  the  Father  as  a  flock,  which  Christ  undertakes  to  save 
completely,  and  to  present  complete  at  the  last  day.  (See  John 
xvii.  2,  6,  9,  11,  12;  and  xviii.  9.)  However  wicked  men  may 
abuse  this  doctrine,  it  is  full  of  comfort  to  a  humble  believer. 
He  did  not  begin  the  work  of  his  salvation.  He  was  given  to 
Christ  by  the  Father,  by  an  everlasting  covenant. 

We  learn  from  these  words  the  great  mark  of  God's  elect, 
whom  He  has  given  to  Christ.  They  all  come  to  Christ  by  faith. 
It  is  useless  for  any  one  to  boast  of  his  election  unless  he  comes 
to  Chri-;t  by  faith.  Until  a  man  comes  humbly  to  Jesus,  and 
commits  his  soul  to  him  as  a  believer,  we  have  no  dependable 
evidence  of  the  r,ian's  election, 

Bcza  remarks,  "Faith  in  Christ  is  a  certain  testimony  of  our 
election,  and  consequently  of  our  future  glorificatiou." 


374  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

Ferus  says,  "  Cleaving  to  Christ  by  faith,  thou  art  sure  of  thy 
predestination." 

We  learn  fom  these  words  the  irresistible  power  of  God's 
electing  grace.  All  who  are  given  to  Christ  shall  come  to  Him. 
No  obstacle,  no  difficulty,  no  power  of  the  world,  the  flesh,  and 
the  devil,  can  prevent  them.  Sooner  or  later  they  will  break 
through  all,  and  surmount  all.  If  "given,"  they  will  "come.' 
To  ministers  the  words  are  full  of  comfort. 

[Bim  that  cometh  unto  me  IwiU  in  no  wise  cast  out.]  These 
words  declare  Christ's  willingness  to  save  every  one  that  comer 
to  Him.  There  is  an  infinite  readiness  in  Christ  to  receive,  pardon, 
justify,  and  glorify  sinners.  The  expression  "  I  will  in  no  wise 
cast  out,"  implies  this.  It  is  a  very  powerful  form  of  negation. 
"  So  far  from  casting  out  the  man  that  comes  to  me,  I  v/ill  receive 
him  with  joy  when  he  comes.  I  will  not  refuse  him  on  account 
of  past  sins.  I  wUl  not  cast  him  off  again  because  of  present 
weaknesses  and  infirmities.  I  will  keep  him  to  the  end  by  my 
grace.  I  will  confess  him  before  my  Father  in  the  judgment- 
day,  and  glorify  him  for  ever.  In  short,  I  will  do  the  very  opposite 
of  casting  him  out." 

The  distinction  between  the  language  of  this  clause  of  the  text 
and  that  of  the  former  clause,  should  be  carefuUy  noticed.  They 
who  "  shall  come  to  Christ,"  are  "  that  whole  thing  "  which  the 
Father  gives.  But  it  is  " each  individual  man"  that  comes,  of 
whom  Jesus  says  "I  will  in  no  wise  cast  him  out." 

To  "  cast  out  of  the  synagogue," — to  "  cut  off  from  the  con- 
gregation of  Israel," — to  "shut  out  of  the  camp,"  as  the  leper 
was  shut  out  (Lev.  xiii.  46),  were  ideas  with  which  all  Jews  were 
familiar.  Our  Lord  seems  to  say,  "  I  will  do  the  very  opposite 
of  all  this." 

A.  Clarke  thinks  that  the  idea  is  that  of  a  poor  person  coming 
to  a  rich  man's  house  for  shelter  and  relief,  who  is  kindly  treated 
and  not  "  cast  out."  But  may  we  not  suppose  after  all  that  the 
latent  thought  is  that  of  the  man  fleeing  to  the  city  of  refuge, 
according  to  the  law  of  Moses,  who,  once  admitted,  is  safe  and 
not  "cast  out"?  (Num.  xxxv.  11,  12.) 

We  learn  from  these  words  that  the  one  point  we  should  look 
to  is,  "whether  we  do  really  come  to  Christ."  Our  past  lives 
may  have  been  very  bad.  Oar  present  faith  may  be  very  weak. 
Our  repentance  and  prayers  may  be  very  imperfect  and  poor.  Our 
knowledge  of  religion  may  be  very  scanty.  But  do  we  come  to 
Christ?  That  is  the  question.  If  so,  tlie  promise  belongs  to  us. 
Christ  will  not  cast  us  out.  We  may  remind  Him  boldly  of  His 
own  word. 

We  learn  from  these  words,  that  Christ's  offers  to  sinners  are 


875 

wido,  broad,  free,  unlimited,  and  unconditional.  We  must  take 
care  that  we  do  not  spoil  and  hamper  them  by  narrow  statements. 
God's  election  must  never  be  thrust  nakedly  at  unconverted  sin- 
ners, in  preaching  the  Gospel.  It  is  a  point  with  Avhich  at  present 
they  have  nothing  to  do.  No  doubt  it  is  true  that  none  will  come 
to  Christ  but  those  who  are  given  to  Him  by  the  Father.  But 
who  those  are  that  are  so  given  we  cannot  tell,  and  must  not 
attempt  to  define.  All  we  have  to  do  is  to  invite  every  one, 
without  exception,  to  come  to  Christ,  and  to  tell  men  that  every 
one  who  does  come  to  Christ  shall  be  received  and  saved.  To 
this  point  we  must  carefully  stick. 

Rollock  observes,  how  close  this  glorious  promise  stands  to  our 
Lord's  words  about  God's  election  and  predestination.  Election 
should  never  be  stated  nakedly  and  baldly,  without  reminding 
those  who  hear  it  of  Christ's  infinite  willingness  to  receive  and 
save  all. 

Hutcheson  remarks,  "  Saints  do  indeed  ofttimes  complain  of 
casting  off;  but  they  are  the  words  of  sense  and  not  of  faith* 
they  may  seem  to  be  cast  off  when  really  it  is  not  so." 

38. — [For  I  came  down... .not  mine  own  will,  etc.]  The  meaning  of 
this  verse  appears  to  be  as  follows.  "  I  did  not  become  man  and 
enter  this  world  to  do  anything  of  my  own  independent  will  and 
volition,  and  without  reference  to  the  will  of  my  Father.  On 
the  contrary,  I  have  come  to  carry  out  His  will.  As  God,  my 
will  is  in  entire  harmony  and  unity  with  my  Father's  will,  because 
I  and  my  Father  are  one.  As  man,  I  have  no  other  will  and 
desire  than  to  do  that  which  is  in  entire  accordance  with  the  will 
of  Him  who  has  sent  me  to  be  the  Mediator  and  Friend  of  sin- 
ners."— What  the  Father's  will  about  man  is,  our  Lord  goes  on 
immediately  to  state  in  the  two  following  verses.  One  part  of 
the  Father's  will  is,  that  nothing  should  be  lost  that  He  has  given 
to  the  Son.  That  "  will "  Christ  came  to  carry  out  and  accom- 
plish.— Another  part  of  the  Father's  will  is,  that  every  one  who 
trusts  in  Christ,  may  be  saved.  That  "will"  again  Christ  came 
to  carry  out  and  accomplish. — The  verse  before  us  and  the  two 
following  are  closely  connected,  and  should  be  looked  at  as  one 
great  thought.  It  was  the  Father's  "  will "  that  free  salvation  by 
Christ  should  be  brought  near  and  within  the  reach  of  every  one, 
and  it  was  also  His  "  will "  that  every  believer  in  Christ  should 
be  completely  and  finally  saved.  To  work  out  and  accomplish 
this  will  of  His  Father  was  Christ's  object  in  coming  into  the 
world. 

The  expression,  "I  came  down  from  heaven,"  is  a  strong 
proof  of  the  pre-existence  of  Christ.  It  could  not  possibly  be  said 
of  any  prophet  or  apostle,  that  he  "  came  down  from  heaven." 
It  is  a  heavy  blow  at  the  Socinian  theory  that  Christ  was  nothing 
more  than  a  man. 


37(3  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

39. — l^TMs  is  the  Father's  luill  ivliich  hath  sent  me.]  In  this  versa' 
and  the  following,  Christ  explains  fully  what  was  the  Father's 
will  concerning  the  Son's  mission  into  the  world.  It  was  that 
He  should  receive  all  and  lose  none,  that  any  one  might  come 
to  Him,  and  that  no  comer  should  be  lost.  It  is  a  cheering  and 
pleasant  thought,  that  free  and  full  salvation,  and  the  final  per- 
severance of  behevers,  should  be  so  expressly  declared  to  be  *'  the 
wiU  of  the  Father." 

[Of  all... given. ..lose  nothing.]  Here  again  there  is  the  same 
form' of  speech  as  in  the  thirty-seventh  verse.  Literally  rendered, 
the  sentence  would  be, — "  that  of  the  whole  thing  which  He 
has  given  me,  I  should  not  lose  anything  out  of  it."  The 
' '  losing"  must  necessarily  mean,  that  "  I  should  let  nothing  be 
taken  away  by  the  power  of  Satan,  and  allow  nothing  to  come 
to  ruin  by  its  own  inherent  weakness."  The  general  sense  of 
the  sentence  must  be,  "  that  I  should  allow  no  member  of  my 
mystical  body  to  be  lost." 

We  have  in  these  words  the  doctrine  of  the  final  perseverance 
of  true  believers.  It  seems  hard  to  imagine  stronger  words  than 
these  to  express  the  doctrine.  It  is  the  Father's  will  that  no 
one  whom  He  has  given  to  Christ  should  be  lost.  His  will  must 
surely  take  effect.  True  behevers  may  err  and  fail  in  many 
things,  but  they  shall  never  finally  be  cast  away.  The  will  of 
God  the  Father,  and  the  power  of  Christ  the  Son,  are  both 
engaged  on  their  side. 

We  have  in  these  words  abundant  comfort  for  all  fearful  and 
faint-hearted  behevers.  Let  such  remember  tl^at  if  they  "  come" 
to  Christ  by  faith,  they  have  been  "  given "  to  Christ  by  the 
Father ;  and  if  given  by  the  Father  to  Christ,  it  is  the  Father's 
will  that  they  should  never  be  cast  away.  Let  them  lean  back 
on  this  thought,  when  cast  down  and  disquieted; — "It  is  the 
Father's  wiU  that  I  should  not  be  lost." 

[Should  raise  it  up  again  at  the  last  day.]  We  have  in  these 
words  the  Father's  will  that  all  Christ's  members  shall  have  a 
glorious  resurrection.  They  shall  not  only  not  be  lost  and  cast 
away  while  they  live  :  they  shall  be  raised  again  to  glory  after 
they  die.  Christ  will  not  only  justify  and  pardon,  keep  and 
sanctify.  He  will  do  even  more.  He  will  raise  them  up  at  the 
last  day  to  a  life  of  glory.  It  is  the  Father's  will  that  He  should 
do  so.  ^'he  bodies  of  the  saints  are  provided  for  no  less  than 
their  souls. 

The  idea  of  some  writers,  which  Bullinger  mentions  with  some 
favour,  that  the  "  last  day"  means  the  day  of  each  believer's 
death,  and  the  "  raising"  his  translation  in  the  hour  of  death  to 
paradise,  seems  to  me  utterly  destitute  of  foundation. 


877 

The  words  before  us  are  a  strong  argument  for  the  '  first 
resurrection,"  as  a  peculiar  privilege  of  believers.  It  is  said  here 
that  believers  shall  be  "raised  again/'  as  a  special  honour  and 
mercy  conferred  upon  them.  Yet  it  is  no  less  clearly  said  in  the 
5th  chapter,  verse  29,  that  "all  that  are  in  the  graves  shall 
Come  forth,'^  both  good  and  bad.  It  follows,  therefore,  that  there 
is  a  resurrection  of  which  saints  alone  are  to  be  the  partakers, 
distinct  from  the  resurrection  of  the  wicked.  What  can  this  be 
but  the  first  resurrection  ?  (Rev.  xx.  5.) — It  must  however  in 
fairness  be  remembered  that  resurrection  is  sometimes  spoken  of 
in  Scripture  as  if  it  was  the  peculiar  privilege  of  believers,  and  a 
thing  in  which  the  wicked  have  no  part.  In  the  famous  chapter 
in  Corinthians,  it  is  clear  that  the  resurrection  of  the  saints  is 
the  only  thing  in  St.  Paul's  mind.  (1  Cor.  xv.)  That  the  wicked 
will  be  raised  again,  as  well  as  the  righteous,  is  clearly  asserted 
in  several  places.  But  it  is  sometimes  a  thing  kept  in  the  back- 
ground. 

40. — [This  is  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me.']  These  words  are 
repeated  in  this  verse,  to  show  that  it  is  no  less  the  Father's 
will  that  Christ  should  receive  sinners,  than  that  Christ  should 
preserve  saints.  Both  things  are  alike  the  purpose  and  intention 
of  God. 

[Every  onetuhich  seeth  the  Son  and  believeth...life.]  These  words 
mean  that  "  every  one,  without  exception,  who  by  faith  looks  to 
Christ  and  trusts  in  Him  for  salvation,  is  allowed  by  Grod  the 
Father's  appointment  to  have  part  in  the  salvation  Christ  has 
provided."  There  is  no  barrier,  difficulty,  or  objection.  "  Every 
one,"  is  the  expression.  jSTo  one  can  say  he  is  excluded. — "  Seeing 
and  believing,"'  are  the  only  things  required.  No  one  can  say 
that  the  terms  are  too  hard.  Does  he  see  and  beheve  ?  Then 
.e  may  have  everlasting  life. 

The  expression  "  seeth  the  Son,"  in  this  sentence,  must  evi- 
dently mean  more  than  mere  seeing  with  the  bodily  eyes.  It  is 
the  looking  with  faith  at  Christ.  (See  John  xii.  45,  where  the 
same  Greek  word  is  used.)  It  is  such  a  look  as  that  of  the 
Israelites,  who  looked  at  the  brazen  serpent,  and,  looking,  were 
healed.  (See  John  iii.  14,  15,  and  Num.  xxi.  9.)  I  believe  that 
this  was  in  our  Lord's  mind  when  He  spake  the  words  of  this 
verse.  Just  as  every  serpent-bitten  Israelite  might  look  at  the 
brazen  serpent — and,  as  soon  as  he  looked,  was  cured,  so  every 
sin-stricken  man  may  look  to  Christ  and  be  saved. 

[J  luill  raise  Mm  up  at  the  last  day.]  These  words  are  repeated, 
I  believe,  in  order  to  make  it  sure  that  a  glorious  resurrection 
shall  be  Ihe  portion  of  every  one  that  only  "looks"  at  Christ  and 
believes,  as  weB  as  of  those  who  enjoy  the  "  assurance"  that 
they  are  given  to  Christ  and  shall  never  be  cast  away.     The 


878 


EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 


humblest  believer  shall  be  raised  again  by  Christ  at  the  first  resur- 
rection, and  eternally  glorified,  just  as  certainly  as  the  oldest 
saint  in  the  family  of  God. 

Stier  remarks,  "  This  raising  up  at  the  last  day,  twice  empha- 
tically affirmed,  points  out  to  us  the  final  goal  of  salvation,  and 
preserving  power;  after  the  attainment  of  which  there  is  no 
more  danger  of  perishing,  or  losing  again  that  eternal  life,  which 
is  now,  the  body  being  raised,  consummate." 

Let  us  mark  what  abundant  comfort  there  is  in  this  verse  for 
all  doubting,  trembhng  sinners,  who  feel  their  sins  and  yet  fancy 
there  is  no  hope  for  them.  Let  such  observe  that  it  is  the  will 
of  God  the  Father,  that  "  every  one  "  who  looks  at  Christ  by  faith 
may  have  everlasting  life.  It  would  be  impossible  to  open  a 
wider  door.  Let  men  look  and  live.  The  will  of  God  is  on  their 
side. 

Calvin  remarks  on  this  verse,  "  The  way  to  obtain  salvation  is 
to  obey  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  If  it  is  the  will  of  God  that  those 
whom  He  have  elected  shall  be  saved,  and  if  in  this  manner  He 
ratifies  and  executes  His  eternal  decrees,  whoever  he  be  that  is 
not  satisfied  with  Christ,  but  indulges  in  curious  inquiries  about 
eternal  predestination,  such  a  person  desires  to  be  saved  contrary 
to  the  purposes  of  God.  They  are  madmen  who  seek  their  own 
salvation,  or  that  of  others,  in  the  whirlpool  of  predestination, 
not  keeping  the  way  of  salvation  which  is  exhibited  to  them," — 
*'  To  every  man,  therefore,  his  faith  is  a  sufficient  attestation  of 
the  eternal  predestination  of  God." 


JOHN  VI.  41—51. 


41  The  Jews  then  murmured  at 
him,  because  he  said,  I  am  the  bread 
which  came  down  from  heaven. 

42  And  they  said,  Is  not  this  Je- 
sus, the  son  of  Joseph,  whose  father 
and  mother  we  know?  how  is  it 
then  that  he  saith,  I  came  down 
from  heaven  ? 

43  Jesus  therefore  answered  and 
said  unto  them,  Murmur  not  among 
yourselves. 

44  No  man  can  come  to  me,  ex- 
cept the  Father  which  hath  sent  me 
draw  liim :  and  I  will  raise  him  up 
at  the  last  day. 


45  It  is  written  in  the  Prophets, 
And  they  shall  be  all  taught  of  God. 
Everyman  therefore  that  hath  heard, 
and  hath  learned  of  the  Father, 
Cometh  unto  me. 

46  Not  that  any  man  hath  seen 
the  Father,  save  he  which  is  of  God, 
he  hath  seen  the  Father. 

47  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you, 
He  that  believeth  on  me  hath  ever- 
lasting life. 

48  I  am  that  bread  of  life. 

49  Your  fathers  did  eat  manna  in 
the  wilderness,  aid  are  dead. 

50  This  is  the  bread  which  com* 


379 


eth  down  from  heaven,  that  a  man 
may  eat  thereof,  and  not  die. 

51  I  am  the  hving  bread  which 
came  down  from  heaven :  if  any  man 


eat  of  this  bread,  he  shall  live  for 
ever :  and  the  bread  that  I  will  give 
is  my  flesh,  which  I  will  give  for  the 
life  of  the  world. 


Truths  cf  the  weightiest  importance  follow  each  other 
in  rapid  succession  in  the  chapter  we  are  now  reading 
There  are  probably  very  few  parts  of  the  Bible  which 
contain  so  many  "  deep  things "  as  the  Sixth  Chapter  of 
St.  John.  Of  this  the  passage  before  us  is  a  signal 
example. 

We  learn,  for  one  thing,  from  this  passage,  that  Chrisfs 
lowly  condition^  when  He  was  upon  earth,  is  a  stumbling- 
hlocJc  to  the  natural  man.  We  read  that  "  the  Jews 
murmured,  because  Jesus  said,  I  am  the  bread  that  came 
down  from  heaven.  And  they  said.  Is  not  this  Jesus,  the 
son  of  Joseph,  whose  father  and  mother  we  know  ?  How 
is  it  then  that  he  saith,  I  came  down  from  heaven  ?" — Had 
our  Lord  come  as  a  conquering  king,  with  wealth  and 
honours  to  bestow  on  His  followers,  and  mighty  armies  in 
His  train,  they  would  have  been  willing  enough  to  receive 
Him.  But  a  poor,  and  lowly,  and  suffering  Messiah  was 
an  offence  to  them.  Their  pride  refused  to  believe  that 
such  an  one  was  sent  from  God. 

There  is  nothing  that  need  surprise  us  in  this.  It  is 
human  nature  showing  itself  in  its  true  colours.  We  see 
the  same  thing  in  the  days  of  the  Apostles.  Christ 
crucified  was  "  to  the  Jews  a  stumbling-block,  and  to  the 
Greeks  foolishness."  (l  Cor.  i.  23.)  The  cross  was  an 
offence  to  many  wherever  the  Gospel  was  preached. — We 
may  see  the  same  thing  in  our  own  times.  There  are 
thousands  around  us  who  loathe  the  distinctive  doctrines 
of  the  Gospel  on  account  of  their  humbling  character. 
They  cannot  away  with  the  atonement,  and  the  sacrifice, 
and  the  substitution  of  Christ.  His  moral  teaching  they 
approve.  His  example  and  self-denial  they  admire.  But 
speak  to  them  of  Christ's  blood, — of  Christ  being  made  sin 


880  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

for  us, — of  Christ's  death  being  the  corner-stone  of  our 
hope, — of  Christ's  poverty  being  our  riches, — and  you  will, 
find  they  hate  these  things  with  a  deadly  hatred.  Tiuly 
the  offence  of  the  cross  is  not  yet  ceased  ! 

We  learn,  for  another  thing,  from  this  passage,  man's 
natural  helplessness  and  inability  to  repent  or  believe.  We 
find  our  Lord  saying, — "  No  man  can  come  unto  me, 
except  the  Father  which  hath  sent  me  draw  him."  Until 
the  Father  draws  the  heart  of  man  by  His  grace,  man  will 
not  believe. 

The  solemn  truth  contained  in  these  words  is  one  that 
needs  careful  weighing.  It  is  vain  to  deny  that  without 
the  grace  of  God  no  one  ever  can  become  a  true  Chris- 
tian. We  are  spiritually  dead,  and  have  no  power  to 
give  ourselves  life.  We  need  a  new  principle  put  in  us 
from  above.  Facts  prove  it.  Preachers  see  it.  The 
Tenth  Ai-ticle  of  our  own  Church  expressly  declares  it : 
*'The  condition  of  man  after  the  fall  of  Adam  is  such 
that  he  cannot  turn  and  prepare  himself,  by  his  own 
natural  strength  and  good  works,  to  faith  and  calling 
upon  Grod."     This  witness  is  true. 

But  after  all,  of  what  does  this  inability  of  man  con- 
sist? In  what  part  of  our  inward  nature  does  this 
impotence  reside  ?  Here  is  a  point  on  which  many  mis- 
takes arise.  For  ever  let  us  remember  that  the  will  of 
man  is  the  part  of  him  which  is  in  fault.  His  inability  is 
not  physical,  but  moral.  It  would  not  be  true  to  say  that 
a  man  has  a  real  wish  and  desire  to  come  to  Christ,  but  no 
pfewcr  to  come.  It  would  be  far  more  true  to  say  that  a 
man  has  no  power  to  come  because  he  has  no  desire  or 
wisli. — It  is  not  true  that  he  would  come  if  he  could.  It 
is  true  that  he  could  come  if  he  would. — The  corrupt  will, 
— the  seci-ct  disinclination, — the  want  of  heart,  are  the 
real  causes  of  unbelief.  It  is  here  the  mischief  lies. 
The  power   that    we    want  is    a  new    will.     It    is    pre* 


JOHN,   CHAP.  yi.  381 

cisely  at  this  point  that  we  need  the  "  drawing "  of  the 
Father. 

These  things,  no  d(  ubt,  are  deej^  and  mysterious.  By 
truths  like  these  God  proves  the  faith  and  patience  of  His 
people.  Can  they  believe  Him?  Can  they  wait  for  a 
fuller  explanation  at  the  last  day  ?  What  they  see  not 
now  they  shall  see  hereafter.  One  thing  at  any  rate  is 
abundantly  clear,  and  that  is  man's  responsibility  for  his 
ow^n  soul.  His  inability  to  come  to  Christ  does  not  make 
an  end  of  his  accountableness.  Both  things  are  equally 
true.  If  lost  at  last,  it  wUl  prove  to  have  been  his  own 
fault.  His  blood  wdll  be  on  his  own  head.  Christ  w^ould 
have  saved  him,  but  he  would  not  be  saved.  He  would 
not  come  to  Christ,  that  he  might  have  life. 

We  learn,  lastly,  in  this  passage,  that  the  salvation  of 
a  believer  is  a  present  thing.  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  says, 
• — "  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  he  that  believeth  on 
me  hath  everlasting  life."  Life,  we  should  observe,  is 
a  present  possession.  It  is  not  said  that  he  shall  have 
it  at  last,  in  the  judgment  day.  It  is  now,  even  now,  in 
this  world,  his  property.  He  hath  it  the  very  day  that 
he  believes. 

The  subject  is  one  which  it  much  concerns  our  peace  to 
understand,  and  one  about  which  errors  abound.  How 
many  seem  to  think  that  forgiveness  and  acceptance  with 
God  are  things  which  we  cannot  attain  in  this  life, — that 
they  are  things  which  are  to  be  earned  by  a  long  course 
of  repentance  and  faith  and  holiness, — things  which  we 
may  receive  at  the  bar  of  God  at  last,  but  must  never 
pretend  to  touch  while  we  are  in  this  world  I  It  is  a  com- 
plete mistake  to  think  so.  The  very  moment  a  sinner 
believes  on  Christ  he  is  justified  and  accepted.  There  is 
no  condemnation  for  him.  He  has  peace  with  God,  and 
that  immediately  and  without  delay.  His  name  is  in  the 
book  of  life,  however  little  he  may  be  aware  of  it.     He 


382  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

has  a  title  to  heaven,  which  death  and  hell  and  Satan  can- 
not overthrow.  Happy  are  they  that  know  this  truth ! 
It  is  an  essential  part  of  the  good  news  of  the  Gospel. 

After  all,  the  great  point  we  have  to  consider  is  whether 
we  believe.  What  shall  it  profit  ns  that  Christ  has  died 
for  sinners,  if  we  do  not  believe  on  Him  ?  "  He  that 
believeth  on  the  Son  hath  everlasting  life :  and  he  that 
believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life ;  but  the  wrath  of 
God  abideth  on  him."  (John  iii.  36.) 

Notes.    John  YI.  41 — 51. 

41. — [The  Jews  then  murmured  at  him.]  The  verb  is  here  in  the 
imperfect  tense.  It  seems  to  mean  "  the  Jews  were  then  mur- 
muring, or  beginning  to  murmur  about  Him,"  It  was  a  mur- 
muring that  went  on  among  themselves  concerning  our  Lord, 
and  was  not  openly  expressed.  "At  Him,"  would  be  more 
literally  rendered  "  about  Him." 

I  venture  to  think  there  is  a  break,  pause,  or  slight  interval 
implied  at  this  point  of  the  conversation.  The  speakers  called 
here  "  the  Jews,"  do  not  appear  to  be  the  same  who  followed 
our  Lord  over  the  lake  after  being  fed  with  the  loaves  and 
fishes,  and  began  the  conversation  by  saying,  "  Wlien  earnest 
thou  hither  ?"  (Verse  25.)  They  would  rather  appear  to  be 
the  principal  people,  or  leaders,  in  the  synagogue  at  Caper- 
naum. They  had  probably  heard  our  Lord's  M'ords  to  the  people 
who  had  followed  Him  over  the  lake,  and  were  murmuring  at 
them. — To  my  own  mind  it  is  by  no  means  clear  that  there  was 
not  at  this  point  a  change  in  the  pJace  where  the  conversation 
was  carried  on.  Up  to  this  point  it  looks  as  if  the  conversation 
was  carried  on  in  the  open  air.  At  this  point  our  Lord  may 
have  gone  into  the  synagogue,  and  the  rulers  of  it  may  have 
taken  up  the  subject  and  been  murmuring  about  it  when  He 
went  in. — I  throw  out  this  theory  with  diffidence.  It  must  at 
least  be  conceded,  that  the  e:xpressions  at  verse  25,  ''when  they 
had  found  him  at  the  other  side  of  the  sea,. ...when  camest  thou 
hither  ?"  can  hardly  be  supposed  to  mean  that  our  Lord  was 
then  in  the  synagogue.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  perfectly  clear 
from  verse  59,  that  the  latter  part  of  His  discourse,  at  any  rale, 
was  spoken  "  in  the  synagogue  at  Capernaum."  Whore,  then, 
I  ask,  does  the  slight  break  come  in,  which  is  necessary  to 
reconcile  these  beginning  and  ending  statements  ?  I  reply  that 
it  seems  to  me  to  come  in  here,  at  this  very  41st  verse.  The 
language,  I  think,  implies  a  slight  pause  in  time,  and  a  change 


VI.  883 

in  the  speake-  Stier,  I  am  a^Yare,  calls  this  idea  "highly  arti- 
ficial" But  I  cannot  see  any  force  in  the  objection,  and  1  see 
much  difficulty  in  any  other  view. 

Cyril  remarks  that  a  readiness  to  murmur  seemed  to  be  here- 
ditary with  the  Jews.  From  the  days  when  they  murmured  in 
the  wilderness,  it  was  always  the  same. 

[Because  he  said  I  am  the  bread.... heaven.]  It  does  not  appear 
that  our  Lord  had  actually  used  these  words.  We  must  there- 
fore suppose  that  the  Jews  constructed  the  saying  out  of  three 
things  that  our  Lord  had  said.  One  was,  "  I  am  the  bread  of 
life;" — another,  "I  came  down  from  heaven;" — and  another, 
"The  bread  of  God  is  he  (or  it)  which  cometh  down  from 
heaven." 

i2. — [Is  not  this  Jesus,  the  son  of  Joseph  ?]  The  word  "  this,"  in 
the  Greek,  has  a  latent  sneer  of  contempt  about  it,  which  our 
English  version  cannot  fully  convey.  It  is  as  if  they  said,  "  Is 
not  this  fellow,"  etc. 

The  expression  "  the  son  of  Joseph,"  shows  what  was  the 
impression  that  the  Jews  commonly  had  about  our  Lord's  birth. 
They  believed  Him  to  be  the  naturally  begotten  son  of  Joseph 
the  husband  of  Mary.  The  annunciation  by  the  angel  Gabriel, 
the  miraculous  conception,  the  miraculous  birth  of  our  Lord, 
are  matters  of  which  the  Jews  apparently  had  not  any  know- 
ledge. Throughout  the  whole  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  we  never 
find  them  mentioned.  For  some  wise  reason  a  total  silence  was 
observed  about  them  until  after  our  Lord's  death,  resurrection, 
and  ascension.  It  was  not  probably  till  after  the  death  of  the 
Virgin  Mary  and  all  her  family,  that  this  great  and  deep  subject 
was  allowed  to  be  much  brought  forward  in  the  Church.  We 
can  easily  see  that  an  unhallowed  curiosity  might  have  arisen  on 
questions  connected  with  the  incarnation,  which  would  only 
have  done  harm. 

[  Whose  father  and  mother  we  know.]  These  words  seem  to 
show  that  Joseph  was  still  living  at  this  time.  They  could 
hardly  have  been  used  if  Joseph  was  dead.  They  also  show 
that  Joseph  and  Mary  were  known  at  Capernaum,  where  this 
conversation  was  held.  They  had  either  removed  there  from 
Nazareth,  or  else  were  so  connected  with  Capernaum  and  such 
frequent  visitors  there,  that  the  inhabitants  knew  them. 

[JIow  is  it  then  that  he  saith.]  The^e  words  would  have  been 
more  Hterally  rendered,  "How  then  does  this  fellow  say?" 
Again,  like  the  beginning  of  the  verse,  there  is  something  scorn- 
ful in  the  phrase. 

[/  came  down  from  heaven.]  The  thing  that  seems  to  have 
vexeil  and  angered  the  Jews  was  that  our  Lord  should  so  openly 


88-i  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

declare  His  divine  origin,  by  talking  of  "  coming  down  trom 
heaven."  They  were  oflended  at  the  idea  of  one  so  lowly  in 
dress,  and  circumstances,  and  position,  taking  on  Himse'f  to  say, 
that  He  was  one  who  had  "  come  down  from  heaven."  Here, 
as  elsewhere,  Christ's  humiliation  -was  the  great  stumbling-block. 
Human  nature  would  not  so  much  object  to  a  conquering  Christ, 
— a  Christ  with  a  crown  and  an  army, — a  Christ  with  wealth  to 
shower  on  aU  His  foUowc-rs.  But  a  Christ  in  poverty, — a  Christ 
preaching  nothing  but  heart  religiofi, — a  Chiist  followed  by 
none  but  poor  fishermen  and  publicans, — a  Christ  coming  to 
suffer  and  die  and  not  to  reign, — such  a  Christ  was  always  an 
offence  to  many  in  this  world,  and  always  will  be. 

Rollock  remarks  with  great  truth,  that  with  many  persons, 
"  reasoning  "  (so  called)  is  the  grand  obstacle  to  conversion. 

i3. — [Jesus  answered  and  said.]  This  phrase  is  almost  the  same  as 
that  used  in  chapter  v,  verse  19,  when  our  Lord  legan  what 
many  think  was  His  formal  defence  of  Himself  before  the  San- 
hedrim. It  leads  me  to  think,  as  I  have  already  said,  that  there 
is  a  slight  break  at  this  point  of  the  chapter,  and  a  slight  pause, 
if  only  of  a  few  hours  in  time.  Our  Lord  knew  by  His  divine 
knowledge  that  the  Jews  w^ere  murmuring  and  saying  contemp- 
tuous things  about  Him,  and  He  therefore  took  up  their  thoughts, 
and  made  a  reply  to  them. 

[Murmur  not  among  yourselves!]  This  seems  a  mild  hint  that 
they  need  not  waste  their  time  in  murmuring.  It  neither  sur- 
prised our  Lord,  nor  discouraged  Him.  It  is  as  though  He  said, 
"  Your  muriimring  is  only  what  I  am  prepared  to  expect.  I 
know  what  human  nature  is.  I  am  not  moved  by  it.  Think 
not  that  your  unbelief  will  shake  my  confidence  in  my  divine 
mission,  or  prevent  my  saying  what  I  do.  I  know  that  you 
cannot  naturally  understand- such  things  as  I  am  speaking  of,  and 
I  will  proceed  to  tell  you  why.  But  cease  from  these  useless 
murmurings,  which  neither  surprise  nor  stop  me." 

Webster  thinks  that  the  idea  is  /the  same  as  that  in  John  iii. 
7—12,  "  I  have  harder  things  still  to  say."  (See  v.  28.) 

44. — [No  man  can  come...except  the  Father  draw  him.]  The  con- 
nection between  this  verse  and  the  preceding  one  is  not  clear. 
Like  many  passages  in  St.  John's  writings,  the  language  is  ellipti- 
cal and  the  hnk  must  be  supplied.  But  the  precise  link  in  the 
present  case  is  not  very  evident.  I  believe  it  is  something  of  this 
sort: — "You  are  murmuring  among  yourselves  because  I  speak 
of  coming  down  from  heaven ;  and  you  are  making  njy  apparently 
low  origin  an  excuse  for  not  believing  on  me.  But  all  the  timo 
the  fault  is  not  in  my  sayings,  but  in  your  want  of  grace,  and 
yuur  unbelief.     There  is  a  deeper  and  more  solemn  truth,  to 


JOHN.    CHAP.   VI.  385 

wliicli  you  seem  totally  blind :  and  that  is,  man's  need  of  God's 
grace  in  order  to  believe  on  me.  You  are  never  likely  to  believe 
until  you  acknowledge  your  ovrn  corruption,  and  ask  for  grace 
to  draw  your  souls  to  me.  I  am  aware  that  it  needs  something 
more  than  argument  and  reasoning  to  make  any  one  believe  in 
me.  Your  unbelief  and  murmuring  do  not  surprise  me  or  dis- 
courage me.  I  neither  expect  to  see  you  or  any  one  else  believe 
until  you  are  drawn  by  my  Father." — This,  or  something  like  it 
seems  to  me  the  connecting  link.  One  thing  at  any  rate  is  cer- 
tain. Our  Lord  did  not  mean  to  excuse  the  unbehef  of  His 
hearers.  He  rather  desired  to  magnify  their  danger  and  guilt, 
and  to  make  them  see  that  faith  in  Him  was  not  so  easy  an  affair 
as  they  supposed.  It  was  not  knowledge  of  His  origin  alone, 
but  the  drawing  grace  of  God  the  Father  which  they  needed. 
Let  them  awake  to  see  that,  and  cry  for  grace  before  it  was  too 
late. 

The  general  lesson  of  the  sentence,  apart  from  the  connection, 
is  one  of  vast  importance.  Our  Lord  lays  down  the  great  prin- 
ciple,— "  That  no  man  whatsoever  can  come  to  Christ  by  faith, 
and  really  believe  in  Him,  unless  God  the  Father  draws  him  so 
to  come,  and  inclines  his  will  to  believe."  The  nature  of  man 
since  the  fall  is  so  corrupt  and  depraved,  that  even  when  Christ 
is  made  known  and  preached  to  him,  he  will  not  come  to  Him 
and  believe  in  Him  without  the  special  grace  of  God  inclining 
his  will,  and  giving  him  a  disposition  to  come.  Moral  suasion 
and  advice  alone  will  not  bring  him.    He  must  be  "  drawn." 

This  is  no  doubt  a  very  humbling  truth,  and  one  which  in 
every  age  has  called  forth  the  hatred  and  opposition  of  man. 
The  favourite  notion  of  man  is  that  he  can  do  what  he  likes,  re- 
pent or  not  repent,  believe  or  not  believe,  come  to  Christ  or  not 
come, — entirely  at  his  own  discretion.  Li  fact  man  likes  to  think 
that  his  salvation  is  in  his  own  power.  Such  notions  are  flatly 
contradictory  to  the  text  before  us.  The  words  of  our  Lord  here 
are  clear  and  unmi^takeable,  and  cannot  be  explained  away. 

(a.)  This  doctrine  of  human  impotence,  whether  man  likes 
it  or  not,  is  the  uniform  teaching  of  the  Bible.  The  natural 
man  is  dead,  and  must  be  born  again,  and  brought  to  life. 
(Ephesians  ii.  1.)  He  has  neither  knowledge,  nor  faith,  nor 
inclination  toward  Christ,  until  grace  comes  into  his  heart, 
Man  never  of  himself  begins  with  God.  God  must  first  begin 
with  man.  And  this  beginning  is  just  the  "  drawing  "  of  the 
text. 

(&.)  It  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England,  as  shown 
in  the  10th  Article,  and  of  every  Protestant  confession  of  faith 
which  dates  from  the  16th  and  17th  centuries. 

ir 


^86  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

(c.)  Last,  but  not  least,  it  is  the  doctrine  of  experience.  The 
longer  ministers  of  the  GTospel  live,  the  more  do  they  find  that 
theie  is  something  to  be  done  in  every  heart  which  neither 
preaching,  teaching,  arguing,  exhorting,  or  means  of  grace  can 
do.  When  all  has  been  done,  God  must  "  draw,"  or  there  is  no 
iTuit. — The  more  the  holiest  Christians  are  examined,  the  more 
general  is  their  testimony  found,  that  without  grace  they  never 
would  have  been  converted,  and  that  God  "drew"  them,  or  else 
they  never  would  have  come  to  Christ.  And  it  is  a  curious  fact, 
moreover,  that  ms  ;y  who  profess  to  deny  man's  impotence  in 
theory,  often  confess  it  in  their  prayers  and  praises,  almost  in 
spite  of  themselves.  Many  people  are  very  low  Arminians  in 
print  or  in  the  pulpit,  but  excellent  Calvinists  on  their  knees. 

When  our  Lord  says,  "  No  man  can  come  unto  me,"  we  must 
carefully  remember  that  it  is  moral  inabihty  and  not  physical 
inability  that  he  speaks  of.  We  are,  not  to  suppose  that  any 
man  can  have  a  sincere  and  hearty  wish  to  come  to  Christ,  and 
yet  be  prevented  by  some  mysterious  impotence.  The  impo- 
tence lies  in  man's  will.  He  cannot  come  because  he  will  not 
come. — There  is  an  Old  Testament  sentence  which  throws  mnch 
Ight  on  the  expression  before  us.  It  is  said  of  Joseph's 
brethren,  that  "  they  hated  him,  and  could  not  speak  peaceably 
ur.to  him."  (Genesis  xxxvii.  4.)  Any  one  must  see  at  a  glance 
what  this  "could  not"  means.  They  "  could  not"  because  they 
would  not. 

When  our  Lord  says,  "Except  the  Father  draw  him,"  we 
roust  not  suppose  that  the  "  drawing "  means  such  a  violent 
drawing,  as  the  drawing  of  a  prisoner  to  a  jail,  or  of  an  ox  to 
the  slaughterhouse,  a  "drawing"  in  short  against  a  man's  will. 
It  is  a  drawing  which  a  Father  effects  through  the  man's  own 
will,  by  creating  a  new  principle  within  him.  By  the  unseen 
agency  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  He  works  on  the  man's  heart,  witli- 
out  the  man  himself  knowing  it  at  the  time,  inclines  him  to 
think,  induces  him  to  feel,  shows  him  his  sinfulness,  and  so 
leads  him  at  length  to  Christ.  Every  one  that  comes  to  Christ 
is  so  drawn. 

Scott  remarks,  "  The  Father  as  it  were  cures  the  fever  of  the 
soul;  He  creates  the  appetite;  He  sets  the  provisions  before  the 
sinner ;  He  convinces  him  that  they  are  wholesome  and  pleasant, 
and  that  he  is  welcome  ;  and  thus  the  man  is  drawn  to  come  and 
eat  and  live  for  ever." 

The  well-known  quotation  from  Augustine,  which  seems  so 
great  a  favourite  with  many  commentators  on  this  text,  appears 
to  me  defective.  He  argues  that  God's  drawing  of  men  to  Christ 
is  so  entirely  a  drawing  through  man's  will,  that  it  is  like  draw- 
ing the  sheep  by  offering  to  it  food, — like  drawing  and  alluring 


JOHN,   CHAP.   VI.  887 

a  child  by  offering  him  nuts. — But  there  is  this  wide  differ- 
ence, that  both  the  sheep  and  the  child  have  a  natural  taste  and 
inclination  for  the  thing  offered.  Man,  on  the  contrary,  has 
none  at  all.  God's  first  act  is  to  give  man  a  will  to  come  to 
Christ.  As  the  10th  Article  of  the  Church  of  England  says,  we 
need  ''  the  grace  of  Christ  preventing  us,  that  we  may  have  a 
good  will,  and  working  with  us  when  we  have  that  good  will." 

The  theory  that  all  members  of  the  Church  and  all  baptized 
people  are  "  drawn  by  God,"  appears  to  me  a  most  baseless 
theory,  and  practically  a  most  mischievous  one.  It  would  re- 
duce the  "  drawing"  to  nothing,  and  make  it  a  thing  which  the 
majority  of  Christians  resist.  I  beheve  the  drawing  is  a  thing 
that  belongs  to  none  but  God's  elect,  and  is  a  part  of  the  pro- 
cedure by  which  their  salvation  is  effected.  They  are  chosen  in 
Christ  from  all  eternity,  and  then  drawn  to  Christ  in  time. 

There  are  several  very  important  principles  of  theology  con- 
nected with  this  remarkable  sentence,  which  it  may  be  useful 
to  put  down  together,  before  we  leave  the  passage. 

(a.)  We  must  never  suppose  that  the  doctrine  of  this  verse 
takes  away  man's  responsibility  and  accountableness  to  God  for 
his  soul.  On  the  contrary,  the  Bible  always  distinctly  declares 
that  if  any  man  is  lost,  it  is  his  own  fault.  He  "  loses  his  own 
soul."  (Mark  viii.  36.)  If  we  cannot  reconcile  God's  sovereignty 
and  man's  responsibility  now,  we  need  not  doubt  that  it  will 
be  all  plain  at  the  last  day. 

(b.)  We  must  not  allow  the  doctrine  of  this  verse  to  make 
us  limit  or  narrow  the  offer  of  salvation  to  sinners.  On  the 
contrary,  we  must  hold  firmly  that  pardon  and  peace  are  to  be 
offered  freely  through  Christ  to  every  man  and  woman  without 
exception.  We  never  know  who  they  are  that  God  will  draw, 
and  have  nothing  to  do  with  it.  Our  duty  is  to  invite  all,  and 
leave  it  to  God  to  choose  the  vessels  of  mercy. 

(c.)  We  must  not  suppose  that  we,  or  anybody  else,  are 
drawn,  unless  we  come  to  Christ  by  faith.  Tliis  is  the  grand 
mark  and  evidence  of  any  one  being  the  subject  of  the  Father's 
drawing  work.  If  "  drawn,"  he  comes  to  Christ,  believes,  and 
loves.  Where  there  is  no  faith  and  love,  there  may  be  talk,  self- 
conceit,  and  high  profession.  But  there  is  no  "  drawing"  of  the 
Father. 

(d.)  We  must  always  remember  that  God  ordinarily  works 
by  means,  and  specially  by  such  means  as  He  himself  has 
appointed.  iSTo  doubt  He  acts  as  a  Sovereign  in  drawing  souls 
to  Christ.  We  cannot  pretend  to  explain  why  some  aie  diawn 
and  others  are  not  drawn.  Nevertheless,  we  must  carefully 
maintain  the  great  principle  that  God  ordinarily  draws  through 


888  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

the  instrumentality  of  His  Word.  The  man  that  neglects  the 
public  preaching  and  private  reading  of  God's  Word,  has  no 
right  to  expect  that  God  will  draw  him.  The  thing  is  possible, 
but  highly  improbable. 

(e.)  We  must  never  allow  ourselves  or  others  to  waste  time 
in  trying  to  find  out,  as  a  firsD  question  in  religion,  whether  we 
are  drawn  of  God  the  Father,  elect,  chosen,  and  the  like.  The 
first  and  indeed  the  main  question  we  have  to  do  with  is, 
whether  we  have  come  to  Christ  by  faith.  If  we  have,  let  us 
take  comfort  and  be  thankful.  None  come  to  Him  unless  they 
are  drawn.  o 

Augustine  remarks :  "  If  thou  dost  not  desire  to  err,  do  not 
seek  to  determine  whom  God  draws,  and  whom  He  does  not 
draw ;  nor  why  He  draws  one  man  and  not  another.  But  if  thou 
thyself  art  not  drawn  by  God,  pray  to  Him  that  thou  mayest  be 
drawn." 

The  words  of  the  17th  Article  of  the  Church  of  England  are 
weighty  and  wise: — "We  must  receive  God's  promises  in  such 
wise  as  they  are  generally  set  forth  to  us  in  Holy  Scripture :  and 
in  our  doings,  that  will  of  God  is  to  be  followed  which  we  have 
expressly  declared  unto  us  in  the  Word  of  God." 

Whether  the  "drawing"  of  God  the  Father  is  irresistible  or 
not,  is  a  point  on  which  good  men  differ  greatly.  My  own 
opinion  is  decided  that  it  is  irresistible.  Those  Avhom  the 
Father  draws  and  calls,  always  "  obey  the  calling."  (See  17th 
Article  of  the  Church  of  England.)  As  Rollock  truly  remarks, 
there  is  often  a  great  fight  and  struggle  when  the  drawing  grace 
of  God  first  begins  to  work  on  the  soul,  and  the  consequence  is 
great  distress  and  depression.  But  when  grace  once  begins  it 
always  wins  the  victory  at  last. 

[/  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day.]  This  is  the  same  sen- 
tence that  we  have  had  twice  already,  and  shall  have  once 
again.  Whosoever  does  come  to  Christ,  and  has  the  great  mark 
of  faith,  shall  be  raised  by  Christ  to  a  life  of  eternal  glory  at  the 
last  day.  None  come  but  those  who  are  "drawn;"  but  all  who 
do  come  shall  be  raised. 

45. — [It  is  written.. .prophets. ..taught  of  God.]  Our  Lord  here 
confirms  the  doctrine  of  the  necessity  of  divines  teaching,  by 
reference  to  the  Scriptures.  He  had  told  the  Jews  nothing  but 
wr.at  their  own  Scriptures  taught,  and  what  they  ought  to  have 
known  themselves.  It  is  not  quite  clear  whether  our  Lord 
referred  to  one  particular  quotation,  or  to  the  general  testimony 
of  the  prophetical  Scriptures.  The  words  of  Isaiah  (hv.  13)  are 
most  like  the  sentence  before  us : — "  All  thy  children  shall  be 
taught  of  God."     The  Greek  of  the  Septuagint  version  of  that 


389 

text  rather  favours  the  idea  that  our  Lord  referred  to  it.  On  the 
whole,  however,  I  inchne  to  the  opinion  that  no  one  particular 
text  is  referred  to.  It  was  the  general  doctrine  of  the  prophets 
that  in  the  days  of  the  Gospel  men  should  have  the  direct  teach- 
ing of  God. 

The  words  do  not  mean  that  under  the  Gospel  all  mankind, 
or  all  members  of  the  professing  Christian  Church,  shall  be 
"  taught  of  God."  It  rather  means  that  all  who  are  God's  chil- 
dren, and  come  to  Christ  under  the  Gospel,  shall  be  taught 
of  God.  It  is  like  "  this  is  the  true  light  that  lighteth  every 
man,"  (John  i.  9,)  where  it  does  not  mean  that  all  are  lighted, 
but  that  such  as  are  lighted  are  lighted  by  Christ. 

[Every  man...heard...learned  of  the  Father,  cometh  unto  me.] 
The  meaning  of  this  sentence  seems  to.be — "Everyman  that 
comes  to  me  has  first  heard  and  learned  of  the  Father."  It  is 
useless  to  talk  of  being  taught  by  God,  and  of  God  being  our 
Father,  if  we  do  not  come  to  Christ  for  salvation. 

Bishop  Hooper  remarks,  "Many  men  understand  the  words, 
'  except  the  Father  draws  him,'  in  a  wrong  sense,  as  though  God 
did  require  in  a  reasonable  man  no  more  than  in  a  dead  post, 
and  do  not  mark  the  words  that  follow,  '  every  man  that  hath 
heard  Christ,'  God  draweth  with  His  Word  and  the  Holy  Ghost. 
Man's  duty  is  to  hear  and  learn :  that  is  to  say,  receive  the  grace 
oflfered,  consent  unto  the  promises,  and  not  refuse  the  God  that 
calleth." — Hooper  on  Ten  Commandments. 

46. — [Not  that  any  man  hath  seen  the  Father.']  This  sentence 
seems  put  in,  by  way  of  parenthesis,  to  prevent  mistakes  in  the 
minds  of  our  Lord's  hearers,  both  as  to  the  kind  of  teaching  He 
meant,  and  the  person  He  intended  when  He  spake  of  the 
Father.  The  Father  was  the  eternal  God  whom  no  man  had 
seen  nor  could  see.  The  teaching  was  that  inward  teaching  of 
the  heart  which  the  Father  gave  by  His  Spirit. 

\He  which  is  of  God,  he  hath  seen  the  Father^  Our  Lord 
plainly  means  Himself  in  this  verse.  It  is  like  John  i.l8.  "No 
man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time ;  the  only  begotten  Son,  which 
is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  he  hath  declared  him." 

I  cannot  but  think  that  one  object  our  Lord  has  in  view,  both 
here  and  in  ch.  v.  37,  is  to  impress  on  the  Jews'  minds,  that  all 
the  appearances  of  God  which  are  recorded  in  the  Old  Testament, 
were  appearances  not  of  the  First  Person  in  the  Trinity  but  of 
the  Second.  His  object  in  both  places,  I  suspect,  was  to  prepare 
their  minds  for  the  great  truth  which  as  yet  they  were  unable  to 
receive,  that,  however  unbelieving  they  now  were,  Christ  who 
was  now  with  them,  was  that  very  Person  who  had  appeared  to 
Abr&^ham,  and  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  and  Moses. 


890  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS, 

47. — [VeHIy,  verily. ..He  that  helieveth  on  me...N/e.]  In  this  vers* 
our  Lord  returns  to  the  main  tliread  of  his  discourse,  which 
had  been  interrupted  at  the  40th  verse.  He  now  speaks  out 
much  more  clearly  and  plainly  about  Himself,  dropping  all 
reserve,  and  revealing  Himself  as  the  object  of  faith,  openly 
and  without  figure.  It  is  one  of  those  great,  broad,  simple 
declarations  of  the  Gospel  way  of  salvation,  which  we  can  never 
know  too  welL 

He  that  would  have  his  sins  pardoned  and  his  soul  saved  must 
go  to  Christ  for  it.  It  is  to  "  me,"  says  Christ,  that  he  must 
apply. — What  are  the  terms  held  out  ?  He  must  simply  trust, 
lean  back,  rest  on  Christ,  and  commit  his  soul  to  His  hand.  In 
a  word,  he  must  "believe."  What  shall  such  a  man  get  by 
beheving?  He  "hath  everlasting  life."  The  very  moment  he 
beheves,  life  and  peace  with  God  are  his  own. — (a.)  Faith,  (b.) 
the  great  object  of  faith,  (c.)  the  present  privileges  to  which  faith 
admits  a  man,  are  three  subjects  which,  however  often  repeated 
in  the  Gospel,  ought  never  to  weary  the  Christian's  ear. 

The  frequent  repetition  of  this  doctrine  of  "believing,"  is  a 
strong  proof  of  its  great  necessity  and  importance,  and  of  man's 
infinite  backwardness  to  see,  understand,  and  receive  it.  "  We 
must  believe, — we  must  believe,"  says  RoUock,  "is  a  truth  that 
needs  constant  repetition." 

48. — [Tarn  that  Iread  of  life.]  Here  our  Lord  distinctly  proclaims 
to  the  Jews,  that  He  himself  is  that  "bread  of  Hfe,"  that 
soul-satisfying  food,  the  true  bread,  the  bread  of  God,  of  which 
He  had  spoken  generally  in  the  earher  part  of  His  discourse. 
He  had  awakened  their  curiosity  by  speaking  of  that  bread  as 
a  real  thing,  and  a  thing  worth  their  attention.  He  now  unveils 
the  whole  truth  to  them,  and  tells  them  plainly,  "  I  am  that 
bread." — "  If  you  ask  what  it  is,  and  where  it  is,  you  have  only 
to  look  at  me." 

49. — [Your  fathers  did  eat  manna... dead.]  In  this  verse  our  Lord 
points  out  the  inferiority  of  the  manna  which  the  Jews  ate  in  the 
wilderness,  to  the  bread  which  He  himself  offered.  Tha  manna 
not  only  could  do  nothing  for  the  soul,  but  was  unable  to  pre- 
serve from  death  those  who  ate  it. 

Here,  as  before,  we  shonld  observe  how  our  Lord  speaks  of 
the  miraculous  feeding  of  Israel  in  the  wilderness,  as  an  un- 
doubted historical  fact. 

Piscator  remarks,  that  our  Lord  here  says  emphatically,  "  your 
fathers,"  and  not  "  our  fathers." — He  thinks  it  was  intentionally 
done  to  remind  the  Jews  how  little  lasting  good  their  fathera 
got  from  the  manna,  and  how  unbeheving  they  were  even  while 


891 

they  ate  of  it;  for  they  all  died  in  the  wilderness.     It  was  a 
tacit  caution  to  beware  of  doing  like  them. 

50. — [This  is  the  hread...heaven...eat..Mnd  not  die.']  The  object  of 
this  verse  is  to  show  the  superiority  of  the  "  true  bread  from 
heaven  "  to  the  manna.  It  is  as  though  our  Lord  said, — "  This 
bread  that  cometh  down  from  heaven  is  bread  of  such  a  nature, 
that  he  that  eateth  of  it  shall  never  die.  His  soul  shall  not  be 
hurt  by  the  second  death,  and  his  body  shall  have  a  glorious 
resurrection." 

I  am  not  without  doubt  whether  our  Lord  did  not  point  to 
Himself  in  speaking  the  words  of  this  verse : — "  This  person 
who  now  stands  before  you  is  that  bread  which  came  down  from 
heaven,  that  any  one  eating  of  it  should  not  die."  But  I 
throw  out  the  conjecture  with  much  diffidence.  Lampe  seems 
to  favour  the  idea, — saying,  "the  pronoun  ' this '  is  here  demon- 
strative and  pointed  to  Himself."  Trapp  and  Beza  also  take 
this  view. 

51. — [I  am  the  living  dread.. .heaven.]  This  sentence  is  a  repetition 
of  the  idea  that  has  been  already  given  out  in  the  50th  and  49th 
verses.  The  thought  is  repeated  in  order  to  impress  it  on  the 
minds  of  the  Jews,  and  make  it  impossible  for  them  to  mis- 
understand our  Lord's  meaning. 

We  must  never  be  ashamed  of  repetition  in  religious 
teaching. 

[If  any  man  eat  of  this  dread  he  shall  live  for  ever.]  The 
thought  here  is  only  an  expansion  of  the  one  contained  in  the 
35th  verse.  There  it  is  said,  '•  He  that  comes  to  Christ  shall  never 
hunger."  Here  it  is  "  The  eater  of  the  bread  of  life  shall  live 
for  ever."  The  meaning  is  that  the  soul  of  the  man  who  feeds 
on  Christ  by  faith,  shall  never  die  and  be  cast  away  in  hell. 
There  is  no  condemnation  for  him.  His  sins  are  put  away. 
He  shall  not  be  hurt  by  the  second  death. 

[The  hread...give  is  my  flesh.]  In  these  words  our  Lord  goes 
e^ven  further  than  he  has  gone  yet,  in  explaining  the  great 
theme  of  His  discourse.  When  He  speaks  of  "  my  flesh,"  I 
beheve  he  means,  "  my  body  offered  up  in  sacrifice  on  the  cross, 
as  an  atonement  for  man's  sins."  It  is  our  Lord's  death  that  is 
specially  meant.  It  is  not  merely  His  human  nature.  His 
incarnation,  that  feeds  souls.  It  is  His  death  as  our  substitute, 
bearing  our  sins  and  carrying  our  transgressions* 

[  Which  I  ivill  give  for  the  life  of  the  world.]  These  words 
appear  to  me  to  make  it  certain  that  the  Lord  meant  "  His  ])ody 
offered  in  sacrifice  as  an  atonement  for  sin,"  when  He  said 
"my  flesh  is  the  bread."  For  He  does  not  say,  "I  have 
given,"  or,  "I  do  give,"  but  "I  will  give."     That  use  of  the 


392  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

future  tense  seems  to  me  a  conclusive  proof  that  "  my  flesh " 
cannot  mean  only  "  my  incarnation."  The  "  giving  "  was  about 
to  take  place,  but  had  not  taken  place  yet.  It  could  only  be 
His  death. 

When  our  Lord  says,  "I  will  give  my  flesh,"  it  appears  to  me 
that  He  can  only  mean,  "  I  will  give  it  to  die,  to  suller,  to  be 
offered  up  on  the  cross,  as  a  sacrifice  for  sin." 

When  our  Lord  says,  "  I  will  give  my  flesh  for  the  life  of  the 
world,"  I  believe  He  means,  "  I  will  give  my  body  to  death,  on 
account  of,  for  the  sake  of,  to  procure,  purchase,  and  obtain  the 
life  of  the  world."  I  will  give  my  death  to  procure  the  world's 
life.  My  death  shall  be  the  ransom,  the  payment,  and  the  re- 
demption-money, by  which  eternal  life  shall  be  purchased  for  a 
world  of  sinners  " 

I  hold  strongly  that  the  idea  of  substitution  is  contained  in 
these  words  of  our  Lor  J,  and  that  the  great  doctrine  of  his  vica- 
rious death,  which  is  so  directly  stated  elsewhere  (Rom  v.  6 — 8) 
is  indirectly  implied  in  this  sentence. 

When  our  Lord  says,  "  I  will  give  my  fle^h  for  the  life  of  the 
world,"  I  can  only  see  one  meaning  in  the  word  "  world."  It 
means  all  mankind.  And  the  idea  contained,  I  believe,  is  the 
same  as  we  have  elsewhere, — viz.,  that  Christ  died  for  all  man- 
kind, not  for  the  elect  only,  but  for  all  mankind.  (See  John  i. 
29,  and  iii.  16,  and  my  notes  on  each  text.)  That  all  the  world 
is  not  saved  is  perfectly  certain.  That  many  die  in  unbelief  and 
get  no  benefit  from  Christ's  death  is  certain.  But  that  Christ's 
death  was  enough  for  all  mankind,  and  that  when  He  died  He 
made  sufficient  atonement  for  all  the  world,  are  truths  which, 
both  in  this  text  and  others  hke  it,  appear  to  my  mind  incontro- 
vertible. 

Let  us  note  in  this  verse  what  a  full  and  broad  offer  Christ 
holds  out  to  sinners.  He  says, — "  If  any  man,  no  matter  who 
or  what  he  may  have  been,  if  any  man  eat  of  this  bread,  he 
shall  live  for  ever."  Happy  would  it  be  for  many,  whose  whole 
hearts  are  set  on  eating  and  drinking,  and  feasting  their  poor 
perishable  bodies,  if  they  would  only  look  at  these  words  I  It 
is  only  those  who  eat  this  bread  who  shall  hve  for  ever. 

Let  us  remember  how  impossible  it  is  for  any  one  to  explain 
the  end  of  this  verse  wlio  denies  the  sacrificial  character  of 
Christ's  death.  Once  grant  that  Christ  is  only  a  great  teacher 
and  example,  and  that  His  death  is  only  a  great  pattern  of  seif- 
denial,  and  what  sense  or  meaning  can  be  got  out  of  the  end  of 
this  verse  ?  "I  will  give  my  flesh  for  the  life  of  the  woiid  "  1 
I  unhesitatingly  say  that  the  words  are  unintelligible  nonsense 
if  wo   receive   the  teaching   of  many  modern   divines  about 


JOHN,   CHAP.   VI. 


Christ's  ieath,  and  that  nothinc?  can  make  them  intelligible  and 
instructive  but  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  vicarious  death,  and  satis- 
feiction  on  the  cross  as  our  Substitute. 


JOHN  VL  52—59 


drink  eth  my  blood,  dwelleth  in  me 
and  I  in  him. 

57  As  the  living  Father  hath 
sent  me,  and  I  hve  by  the  Father : 
so  he  that  eateth  me,  even  he  shall 
live  by  me. 

58  This  is  that  bread  which 
came  down  from  heaven:  not  as 
your  fathers  did  eat  manna,  and  are 
dead :  he  that  eateth  of  this  bread 
shall  hve  for  ever. 

59  These  things  said  he  in  the 
synagogue,  as  he  taught  in  Caper- 
naum. 


52  The  Jews  therefore  strove 
among  themselves,  saying,  How  can 
this  man  give  us  Ms  flesh  to  eat  ? 

53  Then  Jesus  said  unto  them, 
Yerily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  Ex- 
cept ye  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of 
man,  and  drink  His  blood,  ye  have 
no  life  in  you. 

54  Whoso  eateth  my  flesh,  and 
drinketh  my  blood,  hath  eternal 
life ;  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the 
last  day. 

55  For  my  flesh  is  meat  indeed, 
and  my  blood  is  drink  indeed. 

56  He  that  eateth  my  flesh,  and 

Few  passages  of  Scripture  have  been  so  painfully  wrested 
and  perverted  as  that  which  we  have  now  read.  The  Jews 
are  not  the  only  people  who  have  striven  about  its  mean- 
ing. A  sense  has  been  put  upon  it,  which  it  was  never  in- 
tended to  bear.  Fallen  man,  in  interpreting  the  Bible,  has 
an  unhappy  aptitude  for  turning  meat  into  poison.  The 
things  that  were  written  for  his  benefit,  he  often  makes  an 
occasion  for  falling. 

Let  us  first  consider  carefully,  what  these  verses  do  not 
mean.  The  "  eating  and  drinking  "  of  which  Christ  speaks 
do  not  mean  any  literal  eating  and  drinking.  Above  all, 
the  words  were  not  spoken  with  any  reference  to  the  Sa- 
crament of  the  Lord's  Supper.  We  may  eat  the  Lord's 
Supper,  and  yet  not  eat  and  drink  Christ's  body  and  blood. 
We  may  eat  and  drink  Christ's  body  and  blood,  and  yet 
not  eat  the  Lord's  Supper.     Let  this  never  be  forgotten. 

The  oj^inion  here  expressed  may  startle  some  who  have 

17* 


894  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

not  looked  closely  into  the  subject.  But  it  is  an  opinion 
which  is  supported  by  three  weighty  reasons. — For  one 
thing,  a  literal  "  eating  and  drinking  "  of  Christ's  body 
and  blood  would  have  been  an  idea  utterly  revolting  to  all 
Jews,  and  flatly  contradictory  to  an  often-repeated  precept 
of  their  law. — For  another  thing,  to  take  a  literal  view  of 
"  eating  and  drinking,"  is  to  interpose  a  bodily  act  between 
the  soul  of  man  and  salvation.  This  is  a  thing  for  which 
there  is  no  precedent  in  Scripture.  The  only  things  with- 
out which  we  cannot  be  saved  are  repentance  ^nd  faith. — 
Last,  but  not  least,  to  take  a  literal  view  of  "  eating  and 
drinking,"  would  involve  most  blasphemous  and  profane 
consequences.  It  would  shut  out  of  heaven  the  penitent 
thief.  He  died  long  after  these  words  were  spoken,  with- 
out any  literal  eating  and  drinking.  Will  any  dare  to  say 
he  had  "no  life"  in  Him? — It  would  admit  to  heaven 
thousands  of  ignorant,  godless  communicants  in  the  pre- 
sent day.  They  literally  eat  and  drink,  no  doubt  I  But 
they  have  no  eternal  life,  and  will  not  be  raised  to  glory  at 
the  last  day.     Let  these  reasons  be  carefully  pondered. 

The  plain  truth  is,  there  is  a  morbid  anxiety  in  fallen 
man  to  put  a  carnal  sense  on  Scriptural  expressions, 
wherever  he  possibly  can.  He  struggles  hard  to  make 
religion  a  matter  of  forms  and  ceremonies, — ^^of  doing  and 
performing, — of  sacraments  and  ordinances, — of  sense  and 
of  sight.  He  secretly  dislikes  that  system  of  Christianity 
which  makes  the  state  of  the  heart  the  principal  thing,  and 
labours  to  keep  sacraments  and  ordinances  in  the  second 
place.  Happy  is  that  Christian  who  remembers  these 
things,  and  stands  on  his  guard !  Baptism  and  the  Lord's 
supper,  no  doubt,  are  holy  sacraments,  and  mighty  bless- 
ings, when  rightly  used.  But  it  is  worse  than  useless  to 
drag  them  in  everywhere,  and  to  see  them  everywhere  in 
God's  Word. 

Let  us  next  consider  carefully,  what  these  verses  do  mean. 


895 

Ihe  expressions  they  contain  are,  no  doubt,  very  re- 
markable. Let  lis  try  to  get  some  clear  notion  of  their 
meaning.- 

The  "flesh  and  blood  of  the  Son  of  man"  mean 
that  sacrifice  of  His  own  body,  which  Christ  offered  up  on 
the  cross,  when  He  died  for  sinners.  The  atonement  made 
by  His  death,  the  satisfaction  made  by  his  sufferings,  as 
our  Substitute,  the  redemption  effected  by  His  enduring 
the  penalty  of  our  sins  in  His  own  body  on  the  tree, — this 
seems  to  be  the  true  idea  that  we  should  set  before  our 
minds. 

The  "  eating  and  drinking,"  without  which  there  is  no 
life  in  us,  means  that  reception  of  Christ's  sacrifice  which 
takes  place  when  a  man  believes  on  Christ  crucified  for 
salvation.  It  is  an  inward  and  spiritual  act  of  the  heart, 
and  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  body.  Whenever  a  man, 
feeling  his  own  guilt  and  sinfulness,  lays  hold  on  Christ, 
and  trusts  in  the  atonement  made  for  him  by  Christ's 
death,  at  once  he  "eats  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  man,  and 
drinks  His  blood."  His  soul  feeds  on  Christ's  sacrifice,  by 
faith,  just  as  his  body  would  feed  on  bread.  Believing,  he 
is  said  to  "  eat."  Believing,  he  is  said  to  "  drink."  And 
the  special  thing  that  he  eats,  and  drinks,  and  gets  benefit 
from,  is  the  atonement  made  for  his  sins  by  Christ's  death 
for  him  on  Calvary. 

The  practical  lessons  which  may  be  gathered  from  the 
whole  passage  are  weighty  and  important.  The  point 
being  once  settled,  that  "  the  flesh  and  blood "  in  these 
verses  means  Christ's  atonement,  and  the  " eating  and 
drinking  "  mean  faith,  we  may  find  in  these  verses  great 
principles  of  truth,  which  lie  at  the  very  root  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

We  may  learn,  that  faith  in  Christ's  atonement  is  a  thing 
of  absolute  necessity  to  salvation.  Just  as  there  was  no 
srifety  for  the  Israelite  in  Egypt  who  did  not  eat  the  pass- 


S96  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

over-lamb,  in  the  night  when  the  first-born  were  slain,  so 
there  is  no  life  for  the  sinner  who  does  not  eat  the  flesh  of 
Christ  and  drink  His  blood. 

We  may  learn  that  faith  in  Christ's  atonement  unites  us 
by  the  closest  possible  bonds  to  our  Saviour,  and  entitles 
us  to  the  highest  privileges.  Our  souls  shall  find  full  satis- 
faction for  all  their  wants : — "  His  flesh  is  meat  indeed,  and 
His  blood  is  drink  indeed."  All  things  are  secured  to  us 
that  we  can  need  for  time  and  eternity : — "  Whoso  eateth 
my  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood  hath  eternal  life,  and  I 
will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day." 

Last,  but  not  least,  we  may  learn  that  faith  in  Christ's 
atonement  is  a  personal  act,  a  daily  act,  and  an  act  that 
can  be  felt.  No  one  can  eat  and  drink  for  us,  and  no  one, 
in  like  manner,  can  believe  for  us. — We  need  food  every 
day,  and  not  once  a  week  or  once  a  month, — and,  in  like 
manner,  we  need  to  employ  faith  every  day. — We  feel 
benefit  when  we  have  eaten  and  drunk,  we  feel  strength- 
ened, nourished,  and  refreshed  ;  and,  in  like  manner,  if  we 
believe  truly,  we  shall  feel  the  better  for  it,  by  sensible 
hope  and  peace  in  our  inward  man. 

Let  us  take  heed  that  we  use  these  truths,  as  well  as 
know  them.  The  food  of  this  world,  for  which  so  many 
take  thought,  will  perish  in  the  using,  and  not  feed  our 
Bouls.  He  only  that  eats  of  "  the  bread  that  came  down 
from  heaven  "  shall  live  for  ever. 

Notes.     John  VI.  52—59. 

52. — [The  Jews  therefore  strove  among  themselves.] — This  expression 
shows  an  increasingly  strong  feehng  among  the  Jews.  When 
our  Lord  tnlked  of  "coming  down  from  heaven"  they  "mur- 
mured."— When  He  speaks  of  giving  His  "flesh  to  ent"  they 
"strove." — It  is  the  word  rendered  "ye  fight,"  in  James  iv.  2. 
In  what  way  the  Jews  strove  it  is  not  very  clear  to  see.  Wo 
cannot  suppose  that  there  were  two  contending  parties, — one 
favourable  to  our  Lord,  and  one  opposed  to  Him.  It  probably 
weans  thftt  tU&y  began  to  reason  and  argue  among  themselves  in 


397 

an  angry,  violent,  and  excited  manner,  such  as  St.  Paul  forbida 
when  he  says,  "  The  servant  of  the  Lord  must  not  strive." 
(2  Tim.  ii.  24.)     The  same  word  is  used  there  as  here. 

[How  can  this  man  give.. .flesh  to  eat]  The  likeness  should  be 
observed  between  this  question  and  that  of  Nicodemur,  (John  iii. 
4),  and  that  of  the  Samaritan  woman.  (John  iv.  11.) 

There  is  an  implied  scornful  sense  about  the  expression  "  this 
man." 

Cyril  in  commenting  on  this  verse,  points  out  the  unreason- 
ableness and  inconsistency  of  the  Jews,  above  all  men,  in  raising 
difficulties  and  denying  the  possibihty  of  things,  because  they  are 
hard  to  explain  and  preternatural.  He  summons  the  Jews  to  ex- 
plain the  miracles  in  Egypt,  and  those  in  the  wilderness,  and 
He  concludes, — "  There  are  innumerable  things,  in  which  if  thou 
inquirest  'how'  they  can  be,  thou  must  overthrow  the  whole 
Scripture,  and  despise  Moses  and  the  Prophets." 

63. — [Jesus  said...  Verily,  verily,  I  say.]  We  come  now  to  one  of  the 
most  solemn  and  important  sayings  that  ever  fell  from  our  Lord's 
lips.  Having  brought  the  Jews  step  by  step  up  to  this  point,  He 
now  declares  to  them  the  highest  and  most  startling  doctrine  of 
the  (jospel. 

[Except  ye  eat  the  flesh... drink  his  blood.. .no  life  in  you.]  When 
our  Lord  uses  this  phrase  "  except"  at  the  beginning  of  a  sen- 
tence, we  generally  find  something  of  more  than  ordinary  import- 
ance in  it.  Thus,  "  Except  a  man  be  born  again," — "  Except  ye 
be  converted  and  become  as  little  children," — "Except  ye  re- 
pent," (John  iii.  3,  Matt,  xviii,  3,  Luke  xiii.  3.)  Here  He  tells 
the  Jews  that  they  "  have  no  life," — no  spiritual  life,  no  title  to 
eternal  Hfe, — that  they  are  in  fact  dead,  legally  dead,  spiritually 
dead,  and  on  the  way  to  the  second  death,  if  they  do  not  "eat 
the  flesh  and  drink  the  blood"  of  the  Son  of  man, — that  is,  of 
Himself  In  a  word.  He  lays  down  the  principle  that  eating  His 
flesh  and  drinking  His  blood  is  a  thing  not  only  possible  but  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  salvation — is  a  thing  without  which  no  man 
can  go  to  heaven. 

Considering  that  the  Jewish  passover  was  nigh  at  hand,  and 
that  many  of  our  Lord's  hearers  were  probably  on  their  way  to 
Jerusalem  to  attend  it,  it  seems  highly  probable  that  our  Lord 
desired  to  direct  the  minds  of  those  He  addressed  to  Himself  as 
the  true  passover  and  sacrifice  for  sin. 

The  latent  idea  of  the  sentence,  I  firmly  believe,  is  that  first 
passover  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  which  was  kept  on  the  night  when 
the  first-born  was  slain.  The  flesh  and  blood  of  the  lamb  slain 
that  night  were  the  means  of  life,  safety,  and  deliverance  to  the 
Is^raelitcs.     In  like  manner,  I  believCj  our  Lord  meant  the  Jewa 


398  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

to  understand  that  His  flesh  and  blood  were  to  be  the  means  of 
life  and  deliverance  from  the  wrath  to  come  to  smners.  To  a 
Jewish  ear  therefore  there  would  be  nothing  so  entirely  new  and 
strange  in  the  sentence  as  at  first  S'gbt  may  appear  to  us.  The 
thing  that  would  startle  them  no  doubt  would  be  our  Lord's 
assertion  that  eating  His  flesh  and  drinking  His  blood  could  be 
the  means  of  hfe  to  their  souls,  as  the  flesh  and  blood  of  the  pass- 
over  lamb  had  been  to  their  fathers  the  salvation  of  their  bodies. 

But  what  did  our  Lord  mean  when  He  spoke  of  "  eating  his 
flesh  and  drinking  his  blood,"  as  things  indispensably  necessary 
to  life  ?  This  is  a  point  on  which  wide  differences  of  opinion 
prevail,  have  prevailed  in  every  age  of  the  Church,  and  probably 
will  prevail  as  long  as  the  world  stands. 

(a.)  Some  think  that  our  Lord  meant  a  literal  "  eating  and 
drinking  "  with  the  mouth  of  our  bodies,  and  that  the  "  flesh  and 
blood  "  mean  the  bread  and  wine  in  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's 
supper.  This  is  the  opinion  of  almost  all  the  Fathers,  though 
occasional  passages  may  be  pointed  out  in  the  w^ritings  of  some, 
which  seem  irreconcileable  with  it.  It  is  the  opinion  of  most 
Roman  Catholic  waiters,  but  certainly  not  of  all.  It  is  the  opinion 
of  some  modern  English  divines,  such  as  Wordsworth  and 
Burgon. 

(&.)  Some  think  that  the  ''eating  and  drinking"  here  mean 
the  eating  and  drinking  of  heart  and  soul  by  faith,  not  of  the 
body, — and  that  the  "flesh  and  blood"  mean  Christ's  vicarious 
sacrifice  of  His  body  on  the  cross.  They  deny  entirely  that 
there  is  any  reference  whatever  to  the  Lord's  supper  in  the  words. 
They  consider  that  our  Lord  meant  to  teach  the  absolute  neces- 
sity of  feeding  by  faith  on  His  atonement  for  sin  on  the  cross. 
Except  a  man's  soul  lays  hold  by  faith  on  Christ's  sacrifice  of 
His  body  and  blood  as  the  only  hope  of  his  Salvation,  he  has 
no  title  to  or  part  in  eternal  hfe.  This  is  the  opinion  of  Luther, 
Melancthon,  Zvvingle,  Calvin,  Ecolampadius,  Brentius,  Gualter, 
Bulhnger,  Pellican,  Beza,  Musculus,  Flacius,  Calovius,  Cocceius, 
Gomarus,  Nifanius,  Poole,  Cartwright,  Hammond,  Rollock, 
Hutcheson,  Lightfoot,  Henry,  Burkitt,  Whitby,  Leigh,  Pearce, 
Lampe,  Gifl,  Tittraan,  A.  Clarke,  Barnes,  and  most  modern 
divines. 

Among  Romanist  writers,  this  opinion  is  held  by  Cardinal 
Cajetan,  Ferus,  and  Jansenius  of  Ghent.  Even  Toletus,  one  of 
the  ablest  Romanist  commentators  on  John,  admits  that  the 
opinions  of  writers  are  not  unanimous. 

(c.)  Some  Ihink  that  our  Lord  did  not  mean  any  literal  eating 
and  drir.king,  and  that  He  did  not  refer  directly  to  the  Lord's 
supper  when  He  spake  of  His  flesh  and  blood.     But  they  do 


JOHN,    CHAP.   VI.  Bd^ 

think  that  our  Lord  had  the  sacrament  in  view  and  prcispect, 
when  He  spoke  these  words,  and  that  He  did  tacitly  refer  to  that 
pecuhar  communion  with  His  flesh  and  blood,  which  He  after- 
wards appointed  the  Lord's  supper  to  be  the  means  of  imparting 
to  beheving  communicants.  Tins  is  the  opinion,  apparently,  of 
Trapp,  Doddridge,  Olshausen,  Tholuck,  Slier,  Bengel,  Besser, 
Scott,  Alford,  and  some  others. 

I  decidedly  agree  with  those  who  hold  the  second  of  these 
opinions.  I  beheve  that  our  Lord,  botli  in  this  text  and  all 
through  this  chapter,  did  not,  either  directly  or  indirectly,  refer 
to  the  Lord's  supper, — that  by  His  flesh  and  blood  He  did  not 
mean  the  bread  and  wine, — that  by  eating  and  drinking  He  did 
not  mean  any  bodily  act.  I  believe,  that  by  "flesh  and  blood" 
He  meant  the  sacrifice  of  His  own  body  for  us,  when  He  offered 
it  up  as  our  Substitute  on  Calvary.  I  believe  that  by  "  eating 
and  drinking,"  He  meant  that  communion  and  participation  of 
the  benefits  of  His  sacrifice  which  faith,  and  faith  only,  conveys 
to  the  soul.  I  believe  His  meaning  to  be,—  "  Except  ye  believe 
on  me  as  the  one  sacrifice  for  sin,  and  by  faith  receive  into  your 
hearts  the  redemption  purchased  by  my  blood,  ye  have  no 
spiritual  life,  and  will  not  be  saved."  The  atonement  of  Christ, 
His  vicarious  death  and  sacrifice,  and  faith  in  it, — these  things 
are  the  key  to  the  whole  passage.  I  beheve  this  must  be  kept 
steadily  in  view. 

It  is  easy  to  call  the  opinion  to  which  I  adhere  ZwingKan, 
and  low,  and  irreverent.  Hard  words  are  not  arguments.  It 
is  easier  to  make  such  assertions  than  to  prove  them.  I  have 
already  shown  that  many  writers,  wholly  unconnected  with 
Zwingle  or  Zwinglianism,  maintain  the  opinion.  But  I  submit 
that  the  following  reasons  are  weighty  and  unanswerable  : — 

(1.)  To  say  that  our  Lord  meant  the  Lord's  supper  in  this  text 
is  a  most  cruel  and  uncharitable  opinion.  It  cuts  off  from  eternal 
life  all  who  do  not  receive  the  communion.  At  this  rate  all  who 
die  in  infancy  and  childhood, — all  who  die  of  full  age  without 
conring  to  the  communion, — the  whole  body  of  the  Quakers  in 
modern  times, — the  penitent  thief  on  the  cross,  all — all  are  lost 
for  ever  in  hell  1  Our  Lord's  words  are  stringent  and  exclusive. 
Such  an  opinion  is  too  monstrous  to  be  true.  In  fact,  it  was  to 
avoid  this  pamful  conclusion  that  many  early  Christians,  in 
Cyprian's  time,  held  the  doctrine  of  infant  communion. 

Ferus,  the  Roman  Catholic  commentator,  who  considers  the 
eating  and  drinking  here  to  be  only  spiritual,  and  not  to  refer 
to  the  sacrament,  sees  this  objection  clearly  and  puts  it  strongh^ 

(2.)  To  ?ay  that  our  Lord  meant  the  Lord's  supper  in  this 
text,  opens  a  wide  door  to  formalism  and  superstition.  Thou- 
sands would  wish  nothing  better  than  to  hear, — "  He  that  eateth 


400  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

my  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood, — that  is,  eats  the  sacrjimenta' 
bread  and  drinks  the  sacramental  wine, — has  eternal  life."  Here 
is  precisely  what  the  natural  heart  of  man  likes !  He  likes  to 
go  to  heaven  by  formally  using  ordinances.  This  is  the  very 
way  in  w^iich  millions  in  the  Romish  Church  have  made  and  are 
making  shipwreck  of  their  souls. 

(3.)  To  say  that  our  Lord  meant  the  Lord's  supper  in  the  text, 
is  to  make  a  thing  absolutely  necessary  to  salvation  which  Christ 
never  intended  to  be  so.  Our  Lord  commanded  us  to  use  the 
Lord's  supper,  but  He  never  said  that  all  who  did  use  it  would 
be  saved,  and  all  who  did  not  use  it  would  be  lost.  How  many 
hundreds  repent  and  are  converted  on  their  death-beds,  far  away 
from  ministers  and  sacraments,  and  never  receive  the  Lord's  sup- 
per !  And  will  any  one  dare  to  say  they  are  all  lost  ?  A  new 
heart  and  an  interest  in  Christ's  cleansing  blood  are  the  two 
things  needful  to  salvation.  We  must  have  the  Blood  and  the 
Spirit,  or  we  have  no  life  in  us.  Without  them  no  heaven  I 
But  the  Scripture  never  puts  between  a  sinner  and  salvation  an 
outward  ordinance,  over  which  the  poor  sinner  may  have  no 
control,  and  may  be  unable  to  receive  it,  without  any  fault  of  his 
own. 

Archbishop  Cranmer  remarks,  in  his  "  Defence  of  the  True 
Doctrine  of  the  Sacrament," — "The  Romanists  say  that  good 
men  eat  the  body  of  Christ  and  drink  His  blood,  only  at  that 
time  when  they  receive  the  sacrament :  we  say  that  they  eat, 
drink,  and  feed  on  Christ  continually,  so  long  as  they  are  mem- 
bers of  His  body. — They  say  that  the  body  of  Christ  which  is  in 
the  sacrament,  hath  its  own  proper  form  and  quantity;  we  say 
that  Christ  is  there  sacramentally  and  spiritually  without  form 
or  quantity, — They  say  that  the  fathers  and  prophets  of  the  Old 
Testament  did  not  eat  the  body  nor  drink  the  blood  of  Christ ; 
we  say  that  they  did  eat  His  body  and  drink  His  blood,  although 
He  was  not  yet  born  or  incarnate." 

Ferus  says, — "  We  must  take  hold  of  Christ's  flesh  and  blood, 
not  with  our  hands,  but  with  our  faith.  He  therefore  that  be- 
lieves that  Christ  has  given  up  His  body  for  us,  and  has  shed 
His  blood  for  the  remission  of  our  sins,  and  through  this  places 
all  his  hope  and  confidence  in  Christ  crucified,  that  man  really 
eats  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ." 

Cardinal  Cajetan,  quoted  by  Ford,  says,— "To  eat  the  flesh 
of  Christ  and  to  drink  His  blood  is  faith  in  the  death  of  Jesus 
Christ.  So  that  the  sense  is  this  :  if  ye  use  not  the  death  of  the 
Son  of  God,  as  meat  and  drink,  ye  have  not  the  life  of  the  Spirit 
in  you." 

The  opinion  which  many  hold,  that  although  our  Lord  did  not 
directly  mean  the  Lord's  supper  in  this  text.  He  did  refer  to 


401 

it  iniirectly,  and  had  it  in  view,  seems  to  me  very  vague  and 
unsatisfactory,  and  only  calculated  to  confuse  our  minds.— Our 
Lord  is  speaking  of  something  which  He  says  is  absolutely  and 
indispensably  necessary  to  eternal  life.  Where  is  the  use  of 
dragging  in  an  ordinance  wliich  is  not  absolutely  necessary,  and 
insisting  that  He  had  it  in  view  ? — The  truth  of  the  matter,  I 
believe,  lies  precisely  in  the  opposite  direction.  I  believe  that 
afterwards,  when  our  Lord  appointed  the  Lord's  supper,  He  had 
in  view  the  doctrine  of  this  text,  and  used  words  intended  to 
remind  the  disciples  of  the  doctrine.  But  here,  I  believe,  He 
was  speaking  of  something  far  higher  and  greater  than  the  Lord's 
supper. — When  He  spoke  of  the  lesser  thing,  I  have  no  doubt 
that  He  intended  to  refer  to  the  greater,  and  to  turn  the  dis- 
ciples' minds  back  to  it.  But  when  He  spoke  as  He  did  here  of 
the  greater  thing,  I  am  quite  unable  to  believe  that  He  intended 
to  refer  to  the  lesser* 

If  our  Lord  did  really  refer  to  the  Lord's  supper  when  He 
spake  of  eating  His  flesh  and  drinking  His  blood,  it  seems  im- 
possible to  understand  how  Roman  Catholics  can  deny  the  cup 
to  the  laity.  "  Drinking  Christ's  blood  "  is  distinctly  said  to  be 
as  necessary  to  eternal  life  as  "  eating  Christ's  body."  Yet  the 
Eomish  Church  will  not  allow  the  laity  to  drink  Christ's  blood  I 
It  is  evidently  the  pressure  of  this  argument  which  makes  some 
Roman  Catholic  writers  deny  that  this  passage  refers  to  the 
sacrament.  It  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  they  are  unanimous 
on  the  point. 

Rollock  starts  the  question,  why  our  Lord  did  not  plainly  tell 
His  hearers  that  by  eating  and  drinking  He  meant  not  a  bodily 
but  a  spiritual  act, — viz.,  believing.  He  replies,  that  in  this  as 
in  every  case,  our  Lord  did  not  strive  so  much  to  make  men 
understand  words,  as  to  beget  feeling  and  experimental  acquaint- 
ance with  things.  When  the  heart  really  begins  to  feel,  words 
are  soon  understood. 

The  distinction  that  Alford  and  some  others  draw  between 
the  ''flesh"  and  "blood"  in  this  text,  appears  to  me  very  doubt- 
ful. They  think  that  "  eating  the  flesh "  refers  generally  to 
participation  in  the  benefits  of  Christ's  incarnation  and  ascen- 
sion with  a  human  body  into  heaven ;  and  that  "  drinking  the 
blood  "  refers  specially  to  an  interest  in  the  benefits  purchased 
by  His  death. — I  am  not  satisfied  that  this  is  correct.  At  the 
57th  verse,  our  Lord,  speaking  briefly  of  the  truth  just  before 
enunciated,  only  says,  "He  that  eateth  me,  even  he  shall  live 
by  me."  Surely  "eating"  there  stands  for  participation  in  the 
benefits  of  Christ's  death  as  well  as  life  ! 

My  own  impression  is  that  both  "  flesh  and  blood  "  are  men- 
tioned here  by  our  Lord  to  make  it  certain  to  the  Jews  that  He 


402  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

spoke  of  His  death,  and  of  the  oflfering  of  His  whole  body  in 
sacrifice  on  the  cross.  The  body  of  the  sin-offering  was  just  aa 
essential  a  part  of  the  sacrifice  as  the  blood.  (See  Lev.  iv.  1 — 12.) 
So  also  the  body  of  the  passover  Iamb  had  to  be  eaten,  as  well  aa 
the  blood  sprinkled.  The  "  flesh  and  blood  "  are  both  mentioned 
here  because  our  Lord  had  in  view  the  oflering  of  Himself  as  a 
sin-offering, — and  because  he  would  make  it  sure  that  He  meant 
the  "  death  "  of  His  body  to  be  the  hfe  of  man's  soul.  It  is  not 
Christ  incarnate  merely,  but  Christ  crucifiied  as  our  atonement 
and  sin-offering,  that  man  must  feed  upon  if  he  would  have 
life. 

54. — {^Whoso  €ateih...drm]ceth... eternal  life.]  This  verse  is  just  the 
converse  of  the  preceding  one.  As  it  had  been  said  that  with- 
out eating  and  drinking  there  was  no  hfe,  so  it  is  now  said  that 
he  who  eats  and  drinks  has  life.  These  words,  as  I  have  already 
remarked,  appear  to  me  to  make  it  impossible  to  interpret  the 
passage  of  the  Lord's  supper.  Myriads  are  Communicants  who 
have  no  spiritual  hfe  whatever.  Every  one,  on  the  other  hand, 
who  by  faith  feeds  his  soul  on  Christ's  sacrifice  for  sin,  has  even 
now  everlasting  hfe.  "  He  that  beheveth  on  Him  is  not  con- 
demned."— "He  that  believeth  on  me  hath  everlasting  life." 
(John  iii.  18 ;  vi.  47.) 

The  word  "  whoso  "  would  have  been  more  simply  and  literally 
rendered  "  he  that." 

The  "  presentness  "  of  a  true  Christian's  privileges  should  be 
remarked  here  again : — ''  He  hath  eternal  life." 

The  Greek  word  for  "  eateth,"  in  this  verse  and  56th,  is  quite 
a  different  word  from  that  used  in  the  53rd  verse.  The  reason 
of  the  difference  is  not  very  clear,  and  no  commentator  has 
hitherto  explained  it.  Leigh,  Parkhurst,  and  Schleusner,  all 
agree  that  the  G-reek  word  used  in  this  verse  ordinarily  denotes 
the  eating  of  an  animal,  in  contradistinction  to  that  of  a  man. 
Leigh  ob'Eerves  that  the  word  "noteth  a  continuance  of  eating, 
as  brute  beasts  will  eat  all  day,  and  some  part  of  the  night."  I 
venture  to  suggest  that  the  word  is  purposely  used,  in  order  to 
show  that  our  Lord  meant  the  habit  of  continually  feeding  on 
Him  all  day  long  by  faith.  He  did  not  mean  the  occasional  eat- 
ing of  material  food  in  an  ordinance. 

The  word  is  only  used  in  this  and  the  56th,  57th,  and  58th 
verses,  and  in  Matt.  xxiv.  38,  and  John  xiii.  18. 

[I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day.]  These  words  are  a  fourth 
time  repeated,  and  purposely,  in  my  judgment,  to  show  who  they 
are  of  whom  Christ  is  speaking.  He  is  not  speaking  of  all  who 
receive  the  Lord's  supper,  but  of  those  persons  who  are  "  given 
to  him  by  the  Father," — "  who  see  the  Son  and  believe  on  him," 


403 

— who  "  are  drawn  by  the  Father  and  come  to  Christ."  (John  vi. 
39,  40,  4i.)  These  are  the  same  persons  who  eat  His  flesh  and 
drink  His  blood  by  faith.  To  them  belongs  the  privilege  of  a  part 
in  that  first  and  glorious  resurrection,  when  Christ  shall  call  aU  His 
people  from  the  grave  at  His  second  coming. 

55. — [For  my  flesh  is  meat  indeed,  and  my  hlood  is  drink  indeed.']  The 
word  "indeed  "  here  would  be  more  literally  rendered  "truly ;  " 
and  the  word  "  meat"  answers  to  our  word  "food."  The  mean- 
ing is,  "  My  flesh  is  more  truly  food,  and  my  blood  is  more  truly 
drink,  than  any  other  food  and  drink  can  be.  It  is  food  and  drink 
in  the  highest,  fullest,  noblest  sense, — food  and  drink  for  the  soul, 
food  and  drink  that  satisfies,  food  and  drink  that  endures  to  ever- 
lasting life."  (See  35th  verse.) 

Rollock  remarks,  that  the  best  way  to  understand  this  verse  is 
to  make  trial  of  Christ,  and  to  feed  on  Him  by  faith.  We  shall 
soon  discover  how  true  the  words  are. 

Ferus  suggests,  that  there  may  be  a  latent  reference  here  to  the 
forbidden  fruit  which  Satan  promised  should  be  "  meat  and  drink 
indeed  "  to  Adam  and  Eve.  This  stands  out  in  contrast  to  that 
food.  By  eating  the  food  Satan  held  out,  came  sin  and  death. 
By  eating  the  food  Christ  holds  out,  comes  life  and  heaven. 

56. — [He  that  eateth  my  flesh  and  drinJceth  my  hlood.] — These  words 
are  precisely  the  same  as  those  at  the  beginning  of  the  54th 
verse ;  and  there  is  no  reason  why  "  whoso  "  there,  should  not 
have  been  "he  that,"  as  here.  In  the  one  case,  the  man  who 
eats  and  drinks  Christ's  flesh  and  blood,  is  said  to  possess  eternal 
life,  and  in  the  other,  to  be  intimately  joined  to  Christ.  But  it 
is  the  same  person. 

[Dwelleth  in  me  and  I  in  him.]  This  expression  is  meant  to 
convey  to  our  minds  the  close  and  intimate  union  that  there  is 
between  Christ  and  a  true  Christian.  Such  a  man  is  said  to 
dwell,  or  abide  in  Christ,  and  Christ  to  dwell,  or  abide  in  him. 
Christ  is  the  house,  or  home,  or  hiding-place,  within  which  the 
believer's  soul,  as  it  were,  resides ; — and  Christ  dwells  in  the 
believer's  heart  by  His  Spirit,  comforting,  nourishing,  and 
strengthening  him.  (See  1  John  iii.  24,  and  iv.  15,  16.)  See  also 
John  XV.  4,  where  "  Abide  in  me  and  I  in  you,"  might  have  been 
equally  well  rendered,  "  dwell  in  me  and  I  in  you." 

Just  as  "  food  and  drink  "  received  into  a  man's  body  become 
part  of  the  man's  self,  and  are  incorporated  into  his  system, 
and  add  to  his  health,  comfort,  and  strength, — so  when  a  man 
by  faith  feeds  his  soul  on  Christ's  sacrifice  for  his  sins,  Christ 
becomes  as  it  were  part  of  himself,  and  he  becomes  part  of 
Christ.     In  a  word,  there  is  as  intimate  an  union  between  Christ 


404  EXPOSITOKY  THOUGHTS. 

and  the  believer's  soul,  as  there  is  between  a  man's  food  and  it 
man's  body. 

57. — [As  the  living  Father,  etc.]  This  verse  explains  the  intimate 
union  between  Christ  and  the  true  believer,  by  a  far  higher  and 
more  mysterious  figure  than  that  of  the  union  of  our  food  and 
our  body.  The  illustration  used,  is  drawn  from  that  unspeak- 
able and  inexplicable  union  which  exists  between  the  Two  First 
Persons  in  the  Trinity — Grod  the  Father  and  God  the  Son. — It 
is  as  though  our  Lord  said,  "  Just  as  the  Father  sent  me  into 
the  world,  to  be  born  of  a  woman,  and  take  the  manhood  into 
God,  and  yet,  though  I  am  among  you  as  man,  I  live  in  the 
closest  union  and  communion  with  God, — even  so  the  man  that 
by  faith  feeds  his  soul  on  my  sacrifice  for  sin,  shall  live  in  the 
closest  union  and  communion  with  me." — In  a  word,  the  union 
between  Christ  and  the  true  Christian,  is  as  real  and  true  and 
close  and  inseparable  as  the  union  between  God  the  Father  and 
God  the  Son. — While  the  Son  was  in  the  world,  the  carnal  eye 
discerned  little  or  nothing  of  His  union  with  the  Father.  Yet 
it  was  a  true  thing  and  existed.  Just  so  the  carnal  eye  may  see 
little  or  nothing  of  the  union  between  Christ  and  tlie  man  who 
feeds  by  faith  on  Christ.  Yet  it  is  a  real  true  union, — Just  aa 
the  Son,  though  equal  to  the  Father  as  touching  His  Godhead, 
does  live,  in  an  ineffable  and  inscrutable  way,  through  and  by 
the  Father,  the  Son  never  being  without  the  Father  nor  the 
Father  without  the  Son, — so  in  like  manner  the  man  that  feeds 
on  Christ  enjoys  spiritual  life,  only  through  and  by  Christ.  Is 
not  this  St.  Paul's  thought: — "I  live,  yet  not  I,  but  Christ 
liveth  in  me."—"  To  me  to  live  is  Christ."  (Gal.  ii.  20.  Phil.  i. 
21.) 

Whether  our  Lord  is  here  speaking  of  His  human  nature  or 
of  His  Divine  nature,  is  not  quite  clear.  I  incline  to  think  with 
Cyril  and  Chrysostom,  that  it  is  the  Divine  nature. 

RoUock"  remarks,  that  we  have  three  hving  Ones  spoken  of 
here.  (1.)  The  living  Father.  (2.)  The  hving  Son.  (3.)  The 
living  believer.  As  we  are  sure  of  the  life  of  the  Father,  so  we 
may  be  sure  of  the  life  of  the  believer.  The  three  lives  are 
linked  together. 

Hutchcson  remarks,  "  Christ's  living  by  the  Father,  is  not 
only  a  pledge  of  our  life,  but  our  life  holds  also  some  proportion 
cr  similitude  to  His.  For  as  He  hath  life  communicated  by 
eternal  generation,  so  by  regeneration  we  are  made  partakers  of 
the  Divine  nature." 

Winer  remarks,  that  the  Greek  preposition  rend(.'red  "  by  "  in 
this  verse,  means  literally  "  on  account  of;  "  and  that  the  sen- 
tence m^ans,  strictly  and  properly,  *'I  live  owing  to  the  Father:  " 


JOHN,   CHAP.   VI.  405 

that  is,  "  I  live  because  the  Father  hves."     Schleusner  and  Park- 
hurst  say  much  the  same. 

The  ^'  hring-  Father  "  is  a  remarkable  phrase.  It  is  hke  th6 
"Uving  God."  (John  vi.  69.  Acts  xiv.  15.  Rom.  ix.  26.  2 
Cor.  xxxiii.  6,  9.  1  Thess.  i.  9.  1  Tim.  vi.  17  )  It  must  mean 
the  Futher  who  is  the  source  of  life,  who  '*  hath  life  in  himself." 
(John  V.  26.) 
i»  f^. — [I  his  is  that  Iread,  etc.]  Here  our  Lord  sums  up  the  whole 
discourse.  He  reverts  to  the  saying  with  which  the  Jews  had 
begun,  about  the  fathers  eating  manna  in  the  wilderness,  and 
repeats  the  main  points  He  would  have  His  hearers  carry  away. 
These  points  were  as  follows : — (1.)  That  He  himself  was  the 
true  bread  which  had  come  down  from  heaven,  to  feed  the  world 
by  the  sacrifice  of  Himself.  (2.)  That  they  must  not  cling  to  the 
idea  that  their  fathers  had  ever  eaten  this  true  bread,  for  they  all 
died  in  the  wilderness,  and  their  souls  received  no  benefit  from 
the  manna.  (3.)  And  that  those,  on  the  contrary,  who  would 
eat  of  the  bread  He  had  come  down  to  give,  should  live  for  ever, 
have  everlasting  life,  and  their  souls  never  die. — It  is  as  though 
He  said, — "  This  sacrifice  of  Myself  is  the  true  bread  from 
heaven,  of  which  I  spoke  at  the  beginning.  The  eaters  of  this 
bread  are  in  far  better  circumstances  than  your  fathers  when 
they  ate  manna  in  the  wilderness.  Your  fathers  died  in  spite 
of  the  manna,  and  beside  that  received  from  it  no  spiritual 
benefit  whatever.  He,  on  the  contrary,  who  by  faith  eats  the 
bread  of  my  sacrifice  for  sin,  shall  have  everlasting  life,  and  his 
soul  shall  never  die." — All  the  expressions  in  the  verse,  we  should 
remark,  have  been  used  frequently  in  the  discourse,  and  now  all 
are  grouped  together,  and  presented  in  one  view. 

59. — [These  things  said.. .synagogue.. .Capernaum.']  This  verse  is 
not  sufficiently  noticed,  I  venture  to  think.  I  ask  any  one  to 
compare  it  with  the  beginning  of  the  discourse  in  this  chapter, 
at  the  25th  verse, — "When  they  had  found  him  on  the  other 
side  of  the  sea,  they  said,"  etc.  Are  we  to  suppose  that  they 
fjund  Him  in  the  synagogue  ?  I  cannot  think  it.  To  me  it 
seems  that  there  must  have  been  a  shght  break  or  pause  in  the 
discourse.  It  began  at  the  landing-place,  or  outside  the  city. 
It  was  resumed  after  a  short  interval,  of  a  few  hours  perhaps,  in 
the  synagogue.  And  as  I  have  said  before,  the  break  appears 
to  me  to  be  at  verse  41. 

Both  the  discourse  of  this  chapter,  and  that  of  the  preceding 
one,  have  this  point  in  common,  that  they  seem  to  have  been 
delivered  before  formal  assemblies  of  Jews. 

In  concluding  the  notes  on  this  very  important  passage,  T  take 
occasion  to  express  my  entire  dissenfr  from  the  common  opinion 
held  by  many,  that  the  sixth  chapter  of  John  was  inteuded  to 


406 


EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 


teach  the  true  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  supper,  as  the  third  was 
intended  to  teach,  the  truth  about  baptism. — My  own  opinion 
is  flatly  contrary.  I  hoM  that  in  neither  chapter  are  the  sacra- 
ments referred  to  at  all.  I  beheve  that  the  third  chapter  was 
intended  to  counteract  erroneous  views  about  baptism,  by  teach- 
ing the  far  higher  truth  of  spiritual  regeneration ;  and  I  believe 
that  the  sixth  chapter  was  intended  to  counteract  erroneous 
views  about  the  Lord's  supper,  by  teaching  the  far  higher  truth 
of  the  necessity  of  feeding  on  Christ's  sacrifice  by  faith. — In 
fact,  the  true  antidote  to  wrong  views  of  baptism  and  the  Lord's 
supper,  is  a  right  understanding  of  the  3d  and  6th  chapters  of 
St.  John's  Gospel,  and  the  whole  of  St.  John's  first  Epistle. 
Writing,  as  St.  John  did,  the  last  of  all  the  inspired  writers,  I 
believe  he  was  divinely  inspired  to  record  things  which  the 
Church  of  Christ  needed  most  to  know.  And  I  regard  it  as  a 
most  striking  fact,  that  while  he  altogether  omits  to  describe  the 
institution  of  the  Lord's  supper,  and  says  little  or  nothing  about 
baptism  in  the  G-ospel,  he  dwells  at  the  same  time  most  strongly 
on  these  two  mighty  truths,  which  he  foresaw  were  in  danger 
of  being  forgotten, — viz. :  the  new  bu-th,  and  faith  in  the  Atone- 
ment.—Surely  it  is  possible  to  honour  baptism  and  the  Lord's 
supper,  without  thrusting  them  in  everywhere  in  our  interpreta- 
tion of  Scripture. 


JOHN  YL  60—65. 


60  Many  therefore  of  his  disci- 
ples, when  they  had  heard  this,  said, 
This  is  an  hard  saying;  who  can 
hear  it  ? 

61  "When  Jesus  knew  in  himself 
that  his  disciples  murmured  at  it, 
he  said  unto  them.  Doth  this  oflfend 
you? 

62  What  and  if  ye  shall  see  the 
Son  of  man  ascend  up  where  he 
was  before  ? 

63  It  is  the  Spirit  that  quicken- 


eth ;  the  flesh  profiteth  nothing:  the 
words  that  I  speak  unto  you,  they 
are  spirit,  and  they  are  life. 

64  But  there  are  some  of  you 
that  believe  not.  For  Jesus  knew 
from  the  beginning  who  they  were 
that  beUeved  not,  and  who  should 
betray  him. 

65  And  he  said.  Therefore  said  I 
unto  you,  that  no  man  can  come 
unto  me,  except  it  were  given  unto 
him  of  my  Father. 


We  learn  from  these  verses  that  some  of  ChrisVs  sayings 
seem  hard  to  flesh  and  blood.  We  arc  told  that  "  many  " 
who  had  followed  our  Lord  for  a  season,  were  offended 
when  He  spoke  of  "  eating  his  flesh  and  drinking  his 
blood."  They  murmured  and  said  "  This  is  an  hard  say- 
ing ;  who  can  hear  it  ?" 


JOHN,    CHAP.   VI.  407 

Murmurs  and  complaints  of  this  kind  are  very  common. 
It  must  never  surprise  us  to  hear  them.  They  have  been, 
they  are,  they  will  be  as  long  as  the  world  stands.  To 
some  Christ's  sayings  appear  hard  to  understand.  To 
others,  as  in  the  present  case,  they  appear  hard  to  believe, 
and  harder  still  to  obey.  It  is  just  one  of  the  many  ways 
in  which  the  natural  corruption  of  man  shows  itself.  So 
long  as  the  heart  is  naturally  proud,  worldly,  unbelieving, 
and  fond  of  self-indulgence,  if  not  of  sin,  so  long  there  will 
never  be  wanting  people  who  Avill  say  of  Christian  doc- 
trines and  precepts,  "  These  are  hard  sayings ;  w^ho  can 
hear  them  ?" 

Humihty  is  the  frame  of  mind  which  we  should  labour 
and  pray  for,  if  we  would  not  be  offended.  If  we  find 
any  of  Christ's  sayings  hard  to  understand,  w^e  should 
humbly  remember  our  present  ignorance,  and  believe  that 
we  shall  know  more  by  and  bye.  If  we  find  any  of  His 
sayings  difficult  to  obey,  we  should  humbly  recollect  that 
He  will  never  require  of  us  impossibilities,  and  that  what 
He  bids  us  do,  He  will  give  us  grace  to  perform. 

We  learn,  secondly,  from  these  verses,  that  we  must 
beware  of  putting  a  carnal  Tneaning  on  spiritual  loords. 
We  read  that  our  Lord  said  to  the  murmuring  Jews  who 
stumbled  at  the  idea  of  eating  His  flesh  and  drinking  His 
blood,  "  It  is  the  Spirit  that  quickeneth ;  the  flesh  profiteth 
nothing :  the  w^ords  that  I  speak  unto  you,  they  are  spirit 
and  they  are  life." 

It  is  useless  to  deny  that  this  verse  is  full  of  difficulties. 
It  contains  expressions  "  hard  to  be  understood."  It  i3 
far  more  easy  to  have  a  general  impression  of  the  meaning 
of  the  whole  sentence,  than  to  explain  it  word  by  word. 
Some  things  nevertheless  we  can  see  clearly  and  grasp 
firmly.     Let  us  consider  what  they  are. 

Our  Lord  says,  "It  is  the  Spirit  that  quickeneth."  By 
this  He  means  that  it  is  the  Holy  Ghost  who  is  the  special 


408  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

autlioi*  of  spiritual  life  in  man's  souL  By  His  agency  it  is 
fir&t  imparted,  and  afterwards  sustained  and  kept  up.  If 
the  Jews  thought  He  meant  that  man  could  have  spiritual 
life  by  bodily  eating  or  drinking,  they  were  greatly  mis- 
taken. 

Our  Lord  says,  "  The  flesh  profiteth  nothing."  By  this 
He  means  that  neither  His  flesh  nor  any  other  flesh,  lite- 
rally eaten,  can  do  good  to  the  soul.  Spiritual  benefit  is 
not  to  be  had  through  the  mouth,  but  through  the  heart. 
The  soul  is  not  a  material  thing,  and  cannot  therefore  be 
nourished  by  material  food. 

Our  Lord  says,  "the  words  that  I  speak  unto  you,  they 
are  spirit  and  they  are  life."  By  this  He  signifies  that  His 
words  and  teachings,  applied  to  the  heart  by  the  Holy- 
Ghost,  are  the  true  means  of  producing  spiritual  influence 
and  conveying  spiritual  life.  By  words  thoughts  are  be- 
gotten and  aroused.  By  words  mind  and  conscience  are 
stirred.  And  Christ's  words  especially  are  spirit-stirring 
and  life-giving. 

The  principle  contained  in  this  verse,  however  faintly 
we  may  grasp  its  full  meaning,  deserves  peculiar  attention 
in  these  times.  There  is  a  tendency  in  many  minds  to 
attach  an  excessive  importance  to  the  outward  and  visible 
or  "  doing  "  part  of  religion.  They  seem  to  think  that  the 
sum  and  substance  of  Christianity  consists  in  Baptism  and 
the  Supper  of  the  Lord,  in  public  ceremonies  and  forms,  in 
appeals  to  the  eye  and  ear  and  bodily  excitement.  Surely 
they  forget  that  it  is  "  the  Spirit  that  quickeneth,"  and  that 
the  "flesh  profiteth  nothing."  It  is  not  so  much  by  noisy 
public  demonstrations  as  by  the  still  quiet  work  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  on  hearts  that  God's  cause  prospers.  It  is  Christ's 
words  entering  into  consciences,  which  "  are  spirit  and 
life." 

We  learn,  lastly,  from  these  verses,  that  Christ  has  a 
perfect  hnowledge  of  the  hearts  of  men.    We  read  tkat 


JOHN,    CHAP.   VI.  409 

"  He  knew  from  the  beginning  who  they  were  that  believed 
not,  and  who  should  betray  him." 

Sentences  like  this  are  found  so  frequently  in  tlie  Gospels 
that  we  are  apt  to  underrate  their  importance.  Yet  there 
are  few  truths  which  we  shall  find  it  so  good  for  our  souls 
to  remember  as  tlint  which  is  contained  in  the  sentence 
before  us.  The  Saviour  with  whom  we  have  to  do  is  one 
who  knows  all  things  I 

What  light  this  throws  on  the  marvellous  patience  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  in  the  days  of  His  earthly  ministry  !  He  knew 
the  sorrow  and  humiliation  befoi'e  Him,  and  the  manner 
of  His  death.  He  knew  the  unbelief  and  treachery  of  some 
who  professed  to  be  His  familiar  friends.  But  "  for  the 
joy  that  was  set  before  Him"  he  endured  it  all.  (Heb. 
xii.  2.) 

What  light  this  throws  on  the  folly  of  hypocrisy  and 
false  profession  in  religion  !  Let  those  who  are  guilty  of 
it  recollect  that  they  cannot  deceive  Christ.  He  sees 
them,  knows  them,  and  will  expose  them  at  the  last  day, 
except  they  repent.  Whatever  we  are  as  Christians,  and 
however  weak,  let  us  be  real,  true,  and  sincere. 

Finally,  what  light  this  throws  on  the  daily  pilgrimage 
of  all  true  Christians  !  Let  them  take  comfort  in  the 
thought  that  their  Master  knows  them.  However  much 
unknown  and  misunderstood  by  the  world,  their  Master 
knows  their  hearts,  and  will  comfort  them  at  the  last  day. 
Happy  is  he  who,  in  spite  of  many  infirmities,  can  say 
with  Peter :  *'  Lord,  thou  knovvest  all  things  ;  thou 
knowest  that  I  love  thee."    (John  xxi.  1*7.) 

Notes,     John  VI.  60—65. 

60. — [Many,  therefore  of  his  disciples.]  It  is  plain  that  tliese  were 
not  true  believers.  Many  who  followed  our  Lord  about,  and 
were  called  His  "  disciples,"  had  no  real  pfrace  in  their  hearts, 
and  followed  Him  from  carnal  motives.  We  must  expect  to  see 
the  same  thing  in  every  age.     Not  all  who  come  to  church,  nor 

18 


410  EXPOSITORS  THOUGHTS. 

all  who  profess  to  admire  and  follow  popular  preachers,  are  real 
Christians.     This  is  far  too  much  forgotten. 

[This  is  an  hard  saying.]  This  does  not  mean  "hard"  in 
the  sense  of  being  "  difficult  to  understand."  It  is  not  so  much 
"  h;ird  to  the  comprehension,"  as  "  hard  to  the  feelings."  Park- 
hurst  defines  it  as  "  shocking  to  the  mind."  It  is  the  same  word 
that  is  used  in  the  parable  of  the  talents:  "Thou  art  an  hard 
man  "  (Matt.  xxv.  24)  :  and  in  the  Epistle  of  Jude  :  "  the  hard 
speeches  which  ungodly  sinners  have  spoken  against  him." 
(Jude  15.) 

Some  think  that  the  "  hard  saying "  means  the  whole  dis- 
course. My  own  opinion  is,  that  it  refers  specially  to  our  Lord's 
concluding  words  about  eating  His  flesh  and  drinking  Hi^ 
blood, 

[  Who  can  hear  it  ?  ]     The  "  hearing  "  here   is   evidently  th 
hearing  so  as  to  beheve,  receive,  and  obey.     "  Who  can  behev; 
receive,  and  obey  such   a   saying  as  this  ? "  (See   John  v.  24 ; 
viii.  43;  x.  3,  16,  27;  xviii.  37;  1  John  iv.  6.) 

61. — [JesUrS  knew  in  himself.]  This  means,  that  He  knew  by  that 
divine  knowledge,  through  which  He  always  "  knew  what  was 
in  man."  (John  ii.  25.) 

[Ris  disciples  murmured  at  it]  This  would  be  more  literally 
rendered  "  His  disciples  are  murmuring  about  this."  He  spoko 
at  the  very  moment  of  their  murmuring. 

[Doth  this  offend  you  f  ]  This  means,  "  Is  this  saying  of 
mine  a  stumbling-block  to  you  ?  Is  the  doctrine  of  eating  my 
flesh  and  drinking  my  blood,  too  humbling  a  doctrine  for  your 
hearts  to  receive  ?  " 

62. — [  What  and  if  ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  man  ascend.]  This  means, 
"  What  will  ye  think  and  say  of  my  ascension  into  heaven  ?  " 
"  What  will  your  feelings  be,  if  you  behold  this  body  of  mine 
going  up  to  that  heaven  from  whence  I  came  down  ?  Will 
you  not  be  much  more  offended  ?  "  (See  John  iii.  12.) 

The  first  thing,  we  must  remember,  that  the  Jews  "  nmr- 
mured  "  about,  was  our  Lord's  saying  that  He  "  came  down  from 
heaven."  The  second  thing  was,  His  saying  that  He  would 
."give  them  His  flesh  to  eat."  Both  times  our  Lord's  human 
body  was  the  subject. — Here  our  Lord  asks  them  what  they 
would  think,  if  they  saw  that  same  body  "  ascending  up  "  into 
heaven.  Even  then,  after  his  ascension,  they  would  have  to 
"  eat  His  flesh,  and  drink  His  blood,"  if  they  desired  eternal  life. 
What  would  they  think  of  that  ?  Would  they  not  find  it  even 
more  difiicult  to  receive  and  believe  ? 

[Where  He  was   before.]     This  is  an   expression   which  no 


JOHN,    CHAP.   VI.  411 

Socinian  can  explain.     It  is  a  clear  assertion  of  the  "  pre-exist- 
ence  "  of  Christ. 

Some  think,  as  Oishausen  and  Tholuck,  that  our  Lord  only 
means  generally,  ''If  you  are  offended  and  unbelieving,  ever, 
now,  while  I  am  with  you,  how  much  more  will  ye  be,  when  I 
go  away."     But  this  is  a  frigid  and  unsatisfactory  interpretation. 

It  is  fair  to  say  that  Stier  thinks,  with  Chrysostom,  Cyril, 
Theophylact,  and  others,  that  our  Lord  did  not  mean  that  His 
ascension  would  be  a  greater  difficulty  to  His  disciples,  but  that, 
on  the  contrary,  it  would  remove  their  doubts  and  weaken  the 
oflfence  which  they  now  felt.  Hutcheson  and  Alford  seem  to 
agree  with  this.  But  I  cannot  see  it.  Stier  thinks  our  Lord 
implied,  "  Then,  after  my  ascension,  it  will  be  disclosed  to 
you  how,  and  in  what  way,  my  human  corporeity,  become 
heavenly  and  glorified,  may  be  given  to  be  eaten,  and  to  be 
drunk."  (Compare  John  viii.  28.) 

63. — [It  is  the  Spirit,  &c.]  This  text  is,  perhaps,  one  of  the  most 
difficult  in  the  Grospel  of  St.  John.  It  is  easy  to  slur  it  over, 
and  be  satisfied  with  a  vague  impression  that  it  means  "  We 
are  to  put  a  spiritual  sense  on  our  Lord's  words."  That,  no 
doubt,  is  a  true  idea.  But  when  we  come  to  a  close  examina- 
tion of  the  words  which  compose  the  verse,  I  think  no  one  can 
be  satisfied  with  such  a  loose  interpretation  of  Scripture.  That 
our  Lord's  words  "  are  to  be  taken  spiritually,"  may  be  very 
true.     But  to  say  so  is  not  to  explain  the  verse. 

What  is  meant  by  the  expression,  "It  is  the  Spirit  that 
quickeneth  "  ? 

(a.)  Some  think  that  "  the  Spirit "  here  means,  "  the  divine 
nature  of  Christ "  (as  Rom.  i.  4 ;  1  Pet.  iii.  18),  in  contradis- 
tinction to  His  human  nature,  here  called,  His  "  flesh."  (See 
1  Cor.  XV.  45.)  They  consider  our  Lord  to  mean,  "It  is  my 
divine  nature,  as  Grod,  which  is  the  means  of  communicating 
spiritual  benefit  to  men.  My  human  nature,  as  flesh,  could  of 
itself  do  no  good  to  souls.  It  is  not,  therefore,  any  carnal 
eating  of  my  flesh,  that  could  be  of  use  to  you,  and  I  did  not 
mean  any  such  eating." 

This  is  the  opinion  of  Cyril,  Cartwright,  Poole,  Bishop  Hall, 
Trapp,  Toletus,  Eollock,  Hutcheson,  Leigh,  Burkitt,  Qaesnel, 
Burgon,  and  Wordsworth. 

(&.)  Some  think  that  "  the  Spirit "  here  means  "  the  Holy 
Spirit,"  the  Third  Person  of  the  Trinity.  They  consider  our 
Lord  to  mean,  "It  is  the  Holy  Spirit  who  alone  can  convey 
spiritual  fife  to  the  soul  of  man.  The  mere  eating  of  flesh, 
whether  my  flesh,  or  any  other  flesh,  cannot  do  good  to  the 
inner  man.     When,  therefore,  I  spoke  of  '  eating  my  flesh,'  I  did 


4:12  EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 

not  mean  the  bodily  act  of  eating  any  literal  flesh,  but  a  ver;y 
different  kind  of  eating,  and  a  very  different  sort  of  flesh."  This 
IS  the  opinion  of  Zwing'e,  Melaiicthon,  Calvin,  Bucer,  Ecolampa- 
dius,  Pellican,  Flacius,  Bullinger,  ('occeius,  Diodati.  Piscator,  Mus- 
cuius,  Baxt'jr,  Lampe,  Henry,  Scott,  Stier,  Besser,  Alford. 

(c.)  Some  think  that  "  the  Spirit"  here  means,  "the  sp'rituai 
doctrine,  or  sense,"  as  opposed  to  'Hbe  letter,"  or  literal  sense  of 
scriptural  language.  (2  Cor.  iii.  6.)  They  consider  the  sentence 
to  mean,  "  It  is  the  spiritual  sense  of  my  words,  and  not  the  lite- 
ral, wliich  is  quickening,  or  liie-giving  to  the  soul.  When  I 
spoke  of  '  my  flesh,'  I  did  not  mean  my  flesh  literally,  but  my 
fle^h  in  a  spiritual  sense.  My  flesh  literally  could  be  of  no  use  to 
any  one."  This  seems  to  be  the  opinion  of  Chrysostom,  Tiieo- 
phylact,  Euthymius,  Brentius,  Beza,  Ferus,  Cornelius  ^  Lapide, 
Schotrgen,  Pearce,  Parkhu;  st,  A.  Clarke,  Faber,  Barnes,  Webster. 
But  it  is  not  easy  to  make  out  clearly,  in  every  instance,  what  is 
the  precise  meaning  put  on  the  words,  "  the  Spirit,"  by  the  in- 
terpreters who  take  this  third  view.  There  are  not  a  few  shades 
of  variety  in  their  opinions. 

I  must  acknowledge,  that  I  find  it  d  fficult  to  give  a  decided 
opinion  on  the  comparative  merits  of  these  three  views  of  the 
expression  before  us.  Tliere  is  ^oraething  to  be  said  for  each  of 
the  three.  On  the  whole,  I  think  the  second  and  third  are  more 
satisfactory  than  the  first ;  and  I  incline  to  prefer  the  second  to 
the  third.     But  I  say  this  with  much  hesitation. 

Rollock,  who  holds  strongly  that  "  the  Spirit "  means  Christ'a 
divine  nature,  maintains,  that  "  the  flesh,"  means  the  whole 
human  nature  of  Christ.  He  thinks  that  the  meaning  of  "  the 
flesh  profiteth  nothing  "  is,  that  all  the  works  of  our  Lord's  bodr, 
whether  in  life  or  death.  His  fulfilling  the  law,  His  sufferings  on 
the  cross,  derive  their  whole  efficacy  from  the  union  of  the  two 
natures — "  It  is  the  divine  nature  that  is  life-giving.  The  human 
nature,  alone  and  separate  from  the  divine,  is  useless  and  unpro- 
fitable."— He  holds,  therefore,  that  to  eat  the  human  nature  of 
Christ  alone,  i.  e..  His  flesh,  could  do  us  no  good ;  as,  unless  we 
could  eat  His  divine  nature  also,  it  would  be  unprofitable.  He 
concludes,  therefore,  that  the  only  eating  of  Christ  that  can  be 
useful  to  the  soul,  must,  of  necessity,  be  the  spiritual  eating  of 
faith,  and  not  any  car;  al  eatin-  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  Hutche- 
son  agrees  with  this  view. 

The  expression,  "  the  words  that  I  speak  imto  5''0u,  they  are 
spirit  and  they  are  life,"  is  jusc  as  difficult  as  the  former  part  of 
the  text.  The  word  "spirit,''  hei'e,  at  any  rate,  caimot  mean  the 
divine  nature  of  Christ.  IC  it  were  so  taken,  the  sentence  would 
be  unmeaning. — The  word  Spirits  must  either  mean  the  "  Holy 
Spirit,"  or  "  the  spiritual  sense,"  as  opposed  to  the  letter.     The 


JOHN,    CHAP.   VI.  413 

Bentence  then  might  be  paraphrased  in  either  of  the  following 
ways : — (1.)  "  The  words  that  I  speak  to  you,  received  into  your 
hearts  and  beheved,  are  the  Spirit's  influence,  the  ministration  of 
the  Spirit,  and  the  Spirit's  means  of  giving  you  hfe."  This  ia 
RoUock's  view.  Or  else,  (2.)  "  The  words  that  I  speak  unto  you, 
are  to  be  taken  m  a  spiritual  sense ;  or,  are  spiritual  words,  and, 
taken  in  that  sense,  are  Ufe-giving  to  the  soul." — Tiiis  is  Augus- 
tine's view. 

I  must  honestly  confess  that  neither  of  these  explanations  ia 
quite  satisfactory ;  but  they  are  the  nearest  approach  I  can  see 
to  a  satisfactory  interpretation.  The  sentence  is  evidently  a  con- 
cise elliptical  one,  and  it  seems  impossible  to  convey  it  in  English, 
without  a  paraphrase. 

Alford  paraphrases  the  sentence  thus :  "  The  words  that  I  have 
spoken,  viz.,  the  words  'my  flesh  and  blood,'  are  spirit  and  life, 
• — spirit,  not  flesh  only, — living  food,  not  carnal  and  perishable." 
I  venture  to  think,  that  this  explanation  is  not  more  precise,  or 
satisfactory,  than  either  of  those  I  have  suggested. 

The  expression  "the  words  that  I  speak  unto  you,"  must  pro- 
bably be  confined  to  the  words  our  Lord  had  spoken  about  eat- 
ing His  flesh  and  drinking  His  blood,  and  not  referred  to  the 
whole  discourse. 

After  all,  however  difficult  and  elhptical  the  sentence  before  us 
may  be,  there  is  a  truth  which  throws  light  on  it,  with  which 
every  true  Christian  must  be  familiar.  It  is  the  words  of  Christ 
brought  home  to  the  hearts  of  men  by  the  Spirit,  which  are  the 
great  agents  employed  in  quickening  and  giving  spiritual  life  to 
men.  The  Spirit  impresses  Christ's  words  on  a  man's  conscience. 
These  words  become  the  parent  of  thoughts  and  convictions  in 
the  man's  mind.  From  these  thoughts  springs  all  the  man's 
spiritual  life.  The  soul  is  not  benefited  by  bodily  actions,  such 
as  eating  or  drinking,  but  by  spiritual  impressions,  which  the 
Holy  Spirit  alone  can  produce.  In  producing  these  spiritual 
impressions  the  Spirit  specially  employs  the  agency  of  Christ's 
"  words,"  and  hence  comes  the  great  principle,  that  ''  His  words 
are  spirit  and  life." 

64. — [I  here  are  some  of  you  that  believe  not.]  The  connection  of 
this  sentence  with  the  preceding  verses  seems  to  be  this: — "  The 
true  account  of  your  murmuring  and  thinking  my  sayings  'hard' 
is  your  want  of  faith.  You  do  not  reaUy  believe  me  to  be 
the  Messiah,  though  you  have  followed  me  and  professed  your- 
selves my  disciples.  And  not  really  believing  in  me,  you  are 
ofiended  at  the  idea  of  eating  my  flesh  and  drinking  my  blood." 

[Jesus  knew  from  the  beginning  who...beIieved  not]  This  is  one 
of  the  many  places  which  declare  our  Lord's  Divine  knowledge 


iU 


EXPOSITORY   THOUGHTS. 


of  all  hearts  and  characters.  He  was  never  deceived  by  crowds 
and  apparent  popularity,  as  His  ministers  often  are.  When  it 
says  "  from  the  be^^inning,"  it  pi-obably  means  "from  the  begin- 
ning of  His  ministry,  and  from  the  time  when  the  unbelieving 
^  many '  before  Him  first  professed  to  be  His  disciples."  Of  course 
our  Lord,  as  God,  knew  all  things  "from  the  beginning"  of  the 
world.  But  it  does  not  seem  necessary  to  suppose  that  this  is 
meant  here. 

Rollock  remarks  our  Lord's  example  of  patient  teaching  and 
preaching  to  all  without  exception,  though  He  knew  that  many 
did  not  and  would  not  beUeve.  He  poinis  out  what  a  pattern  it 
is  to  ministers.  Christ  knew  exactly  who  would  beUeve.  Minis- 
ters do  not  know. 

[  WJio  should  hetray  him.]  We  should  not  fail  to  notice  in  this 
expression  our  Lord's  marvellous  patience  in  allowing  one  whom 
He  knew  to  be  about  to  betray  Him  to  be  one  of  His  Apostles. 
It  was  doubtless  meant  to  teach  us  that  false  profession  must  be 
expected  everywhere,  and  must  not  surprise  us.  How  much  we 
ought  to  tolerate  and  put  up  wit^h,  if  our  Lord  tolerated  Judas 
near  him  !  The  pain  and  sorrow  which  the  foreknowledge  of 
the  conduct  of  Judas  must  have  caused  to  our  Lord's  heart,  is  a 
circumstance  in  our  Lord's  sufferings  which  ought  not  to  be 
forgotten. 
65. — [And  he  said.  Therefore  said  I,  etc.,  etc.]  The  connection  of 
this  verse  seems  to  be  as  follows : — "  There  are  some  of  you  that 
believe  not,  and  that  is  the  reason  why  I  said  to  you,  that  no 
man  can  come  to  me  unless  the  Father  gives  him  grace  to  come, 
and  draws  his  heart  to  me.  The  Father  has  not  given  you  grace, 
and  drawn  you  to  me,  and  therefore  you  do  not  believe." 


JOHN  YL  66— n. 


66  From  that  time  many  of  his 
disciples  went  back,  and  walked  no 
more  with  him. 

67  Tlieu  said  Jesus  unto  the 
twelve,  Will  ye  also  go  away  ? 

08  Tlien  Simon  Peter  answered 
him,  Lord,  to  whom  shall  we  go  ? 
thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  Ufe. 

69  And  we  believe  and  are  sure 


that  thou  art  that  Christ,  the  Son 
of  the  living  God. 

10  Jesus  answered  them,  Have 
not  I  chosen  you  twelve,  and  one 
of  you  is  a  devil  ? 

11  He  spake  of  Judas  Iscariot, 
the  son  of  Simon  :  for  he  it  was  that 
should  betray  him,  being  one  of 
the  twelve. 


These  verses  form  a  sorrowful  conclusion  to  the  famous 
discourse  of  Christ  which  occupies  the  greater  part  of  the 


JOHN,    CHAP.   VI.  415 

Bixth  chapter.  They  supply  a  melancholy  proof  of  the 
hardness  and  corruption  of  man's  heart.  Even  when  the 
Son  of  God  was  the  preacher,  many  seem  to  have  heard  in 
vain. 

Let  us  mark  in  this  passage  what  an  old  sin  hacksliding 
is.  We  read  that  when  our  Lord  had  explained  what  He 
meant  by  "  eating  and  drinking  his  flesh  and  blood," — 
*'  From  that  time  many  went  back  and  walked  no  more 
with  him." 

The  true  grace  of  God  no  doubt  is  an  everlasting 
possession.  From  this  men  never  fall  away  entirely,  when 
they  have  once  received  it.  "The  foundation  of  God 
standeth  sure."  "  My  sheep  shall  never  perish."  (2  Tim.  ii. 
19  ;  John  x.  28.)  But  there  is  counterfeit  grace  and  un- 
real religion  in  the  Church,  wherever  there  is  true ;  and 
from  counterfeit  grace  thousands  may  and"  do  fall  away. 
Like  the  stony  ground  hearers,  in  the  parable  of  the  sower, 
many  "  have  no  root  in  themselves,  and  so  in  time  of  temp- 
tation fall  away."  All  is  not  gold  that  glitters.  All 
blossoms  do  not  come  to  fruit.  All  are  not  Israel  which 
are  called  Israel.  Men  may  have  feelings,  desires,  convic- 
tions, resolutions,  hopes,  joys,  sorrows  in  religion,  and  yet 
never  have  the  grace  of  God.  They  may  run  well  for  a 
Beason,  and  bid  fair  to  reach  heaven,  and  yet  break  down 
entirely  after  a  time,  go  back  to  the  world,  and  end  like 
Demas,  Judas  Iscariot,  and  Lot's  wife. 

It  must  never  surprise  us  to  see  and  hear  of  such  cases 
in  our  own  days.  If  it  happened  in  our  Lord's  time  and 
under  our  Lord's  teaching,  much  more  may  we  expect  it 
to  happen  now.  Above  all,  it  must  never  shake  our  faith 
and  discourage  us  in  our  course.  On  the  contrary,  we 
must  make  up  our  minds  that  there  will  be  backsliders  in 
the  Church  as  long  as  the  world  stands.  The  sneering  in- 
fidel, who  defends  his  unbelief  by  pointing  at  them,  must 
find  some  better  argument  than  their  example.    He  forgets 


416  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

that  there  will  always  be  counterfeit  coin  wheie  there  is 
true  money. 

Let  us  mark,  secondly,  in  this  passage,  the  noble  declara' 
Hon  of  faith  which  the  Apostle  Peter  made.  Our  Lord 
had  said  to  the  twelve,  when  many  went  back,  "  Will  ye 
also  go  away  ?"  At  once  Peter  replied,  with  character- 
istic zeal  and  fervour,  "  Lord,  to  whom  shall  we  go  ?  thou 
hast  the  words  of  eternal  life.  And  we  believe  and  art 
sure  that  thou  art  that  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living 
God." 

The  confession  contained  in  these  words  is  a  very  re- 
markable one.  Living  in  a  professedly  Christian  land,  and 
surrounded  by  Christian  privileges,  we  can  hardly  form  an 
adequate  idea  of  its  real  value.  For  a  humble  Jew  to  say 
of  one  whom  Scribes,  and  Pharisees,  and  Sadducees  agreed 
in  rejecting,  "Thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life;  thou 
art  the  Christ,"  was  an  act  of  mighty  faith.  No  wonder 
that  our  Lord  said,  in  another  place,  "  Blessed  art  thou, 
Simon  Bar-jona :  for  flesh  and  blood  hath  not  revealed  it 
unto  thee,  but  my  Father  wkich  is  in  heaven."  (Matt, 
xvi.  18.) 

But  the  question  with  which  Peter  begins,  is  just  as  re- 
markable as  his  confession.  "  To  whom  shall  we  go  ?"  said 
the  noble-hearted  Apostle.  "  Whom  shall  we  follow  ?  To 
what  teacher  shall  we  betake  ourselves  ?  Where  shall  we 
find  any  guide  to  heaven  to  compare  with  thee  ?  What 
shall  we  gain  by  forsaking  thee?  What  Scribe,  what 
Pharisee,  what  Sadducee,  what  Priest,  what  Rabbi 
can  show  us  such  words  of  eternal  life  as  thou  showest  ?" 

The  question  is  one  which  every  true  Christian  may 
boldly  ask,  when  urged  and  tempted  to  give  up  his  reli- 
gion, and  go  back  to  the  world.  It  is  easy  for  those  who 
hate  religion  to  pick  holes  in  our  conduct,  to  make  objec- 
tions to  our  doctrines,  to  find  fault  with  our  practices.  It 
may  be  hard  sometimes  to  give  them  any  answer.     But 


JOHN",    CHAP.   VI.  417 

after  all,  "  To  whom  shall  we  go,"  if  we  give  up  our  reli- 
gion ?  Where  shall  we  find  such  peace,  and  hope,  and 
solid  comfort  as  in  serving  Christ,  however  poorly  we 
serve  Him  ?  Can  we  better  ourselves  by  turning  our  back- 
on  Christ,  and  going  back  to  our  old  ways  ?  "We  cannot. 
Then  let  us  hold  on  our  way  and  persevere. 

Let  us  mark,  lastly,  in  this  passage,  what  little  benefit 
some  men  get  from  religious  privileges.  We  read  that 
our  Lord  said,  "  Have  not  I  chosen  you  twelve,  and  one 
of  you  is  a  devil."  And  it  goes  on,  "He  spake  of  Judas 
Iscariot,  the  son  of  Simon." 

If  ever  there  was  a  man  who  had  great  privileges  and 
opportunities,  that  man  was  Judas  Iscariot.  A  chosen  dis- 
ciple,  a  constant  companion  of  Christ,  a  witness  of  His 
miracles,  a  hearer  of  His  sermons,  a  commissioned  preach- 
er of  His  kingdom,  a  fellow  and  friend  of  Peter,  James, 
and  John, — it  would  be  impossible  to  imagine  a  more  fa- 
vourable position  for  a  man's  soul.  Yet  if  anyone  ever  fell 
hopelessly  into  hell,  and  made  shipwreck  at  last  for  eter- 
nity, that  man  was  Judas  Iscariot.  The  character  of  that 
man  must  have  been  black  indeed,  of  whom  our  Lord  could 
say  he  is  "  a  devil." 

Let  us  settle  it  firmly  in  our  minds,  that  the  possession 
of  religious  privileges  alone  is  not  enough  to  save  our  souls. 
It  is  neither  place,  nor  light,  nor  company,  nor  opportuni- 
ties, but  grace  that  man  needs  to  make  him  a  Christian. 
With  grace  we  may  serve  God  in  the  most  difficult  posi- 
tion,— like  Daniel  in  Babylon,  Obadiah  in  Ahab's  court, 
and  the  saints  in  Nero's  household.  Without  grace  we 
may  live  in  the  full  sunshine  of  Christ's  countenance,  and 
yet,  like  Judas,  be  miserably  cast  away.  Then  let  us  never 
rest  till  we  have  grace  reigning  in  our  souls.  Grace  is  to 
be  had  for  the  asking.  There  is  One  sitting  at  the  right 
hand  of  God  who  has  said, — "  Ask,  and  it  shall  be  given 
you."  (Matt.  vii.  V.)     The  Lord  Jesus  is  more  willing  to 

18* 


ilS  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

give  grace  than  man  is  to  seek  it.    If  men  have  it  not,  it  is 
because  they  do  not  ask  it. 

Notes.    JoHxN  YI.  66—71. 

66. — [From  that  time.]  It  is  doubtful  whether  the  Greek  words 
here  might  not  have  been  better  translated,  "Upon  this," — 
"  After  this  conversation." 

[Many  of  his  disciples.]  This  expression  shows  that  the  num- 
ber of  persons  who  followed  our  Lord  about,  and  professed  them- 
selves His  disciples,  must  have  been  large. 

[  Went  hackward.]  Thie  is  a  metaphorical  expression,  signifying 
"retreat,  desertion,  forsaking  a  position  once  occupied."  It  is 
the  same  that  is  rendered  in  the  account  of  the  Jews  coming  to 
take  our  Lord  in  the  garden,  "  they  went  backward,  and  fell  to 
the  ground."  (John  xviii.  6.) 

[  Walked  no  more  with  him^  The  simplest  view  of  this  expres- 
sion is,  that  these  deserters  from  our  Lord  walked  no  longer  in  His 
company  as  He  went  about  teaching,  as  they  had  done,  but  re- 
turned to  their  own  homes.  No  minister  of  the  Gospel  should 
feel  surprised  if  the  same  thing  happens  to  him. 

Not  a  few  of  these  very  "  disciples,"  probably,  had  been  for- 
ward in  wishing  to  make  our  Lord  a  "  king,"  the  day  before. 
Such  is  popularity,  here  to-day  and  gone  to-morrow ! 

67. — [Then  said  Jesus  unto  the  twelve,  Will  ye  also  go  away?]  We 
cannot  suppose  that  our  Lord  asked  this,  as  if  He  did  not  know 
what  the  Apostles  were  going  to  do.  We  may  be  sure  that  He 
who  "  knew  from  the  beginning  who  they  were  that  beheved 
not"  (verse  64),  knew  the  hearts  of  His  Apostles.  The  question 
was  evidently  asked  to  prove  His  chosen  followers,  and  to  draw 
forth  from  them  an  expression  of  feehng.     (See  John  vi.  6.) 

The  word  "will"  here,  would  be  more  accurately  rendered. 
"  Do  you  wish  ?"     "  Have  you  a  will?" 

We  should  note  that  this  is  the  first  time  St.  John  speaks 
of  "the  twelve."  We  know  from  the  other  Gospels,  that  "the 
twelve  "  were  em[)loyed  in  distributing  the  loaves  and  fishes  to 
the  five  thousand.  (Luke  ix.  12,  17.) 

C8. — [Then  Simon  Peter  answered  him.]  The  fervour  and  impetu- 
osity of  Peter's  character  come  out  here,  as  in  other  places  in  the 
Gospels.  He  is  the  first  to  speak,  and  to  speak  for  his  brethren 
as  Avell  as  himself.  Only  the  night  before  this  very  scene,  he  had 
been  the  first,  in  the  storm  on  the  lake,  to  say,  "  Lord,  if  it  be 
thoii,  bid  me  to  come  unto  thee  on  the  water."  (^fatt.  xiv.  28.) 
And  here,  in  like  manner,  he  is  the  first  to  profess  loudly  his 
determination  not  to  go  away,  and  his  faith  in  Christ. 


419 

[To  whom  slidll  we  go  ?]  This  question  is  a  strong  burst  of 
feeling  "  To  wliat  teacher,  to  what  master,  to  what  leader  shall 
we  go,  if  we  leave  thee  ?  Where  are  we  to  find  any  one  like 
thee  ?  What  could  we  gain  by  leaving  thee  ?"  The  question 
was  one  which  might  well  be  asked,  when  we  remember  the 
state  of  the  Jewish  nation,  and  the  universal  prevalence  of  Pha- 
risaism or  Sadduceeism.  But  this  is  not  all.  It  may  always 
be  asked  by  true  Christian  men,  when  tempted  to  give  up  Christ's 
service.  True  Christianity  undoubtedly  has  its  cross.  It  entails 
trial  and  persecution.  But  to  whom  shall  we  go,  if  we  give  up 
Christ?  WiU  Infidelity,  Deism,  Socinianism,  Romanism,  For- 
malism, Rationalism,  or  Worldliness  give  us  anything  better? 
There  is  but  one  answer  1     They  cannot. 

[Thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life.]  This  would  be  more 
literally  rendered,  "  thou  hast  words  of  eternal  life."  "  Thou 
possessest  instruction  about  everlasting  life,  such  as  we  can  hear 
nowhere  else,  aud  such  as  we  find  soul-comforting  and  edifying. 
The  sayings  that  fall  continually  from  thy  lips,  about  eternal 
life,  are  such  as  we  cannot  leave."  Our  Lord's  expression  should 
be  remembered,  "  I  have  given  unto  them  the  words  which  thou 
gavest  me."  (John  xvii.  8.) 

69. — [And  lue  believe  and  are  surei]  This  would  be  more  literally 
rendered,  "  we  have  beheved  and  have  known."  Moreover,  the 
"  we"  is  emphatic. — "  Whatever  others  may  please  to  think, 
however  many  may  go  away  and  forsake  thee,  after  following 
thee  for  a  little,  it  is  not  so  with  us.  We  have  beheved  and 
known,  and  do  beheve  and  know." 

[Thou  art  that  Christy  the  son  of  the  living  Godi]  This  might 
equally  well  have  been  rendered,  *'  Thou  art  the  Clirist."  The 
sentence  is  a  noble  confession,  when  we  remember  the  time  in 
which  it  was  made,  and  the  universal  unbelief  of  the  leaders  of 
the  Jewish  nation.  We  may  remember,  that  it  is  precisely  the 
same  confession  that  is  recorded  to  have  been  made  by  Peter, 
after  our  Lord  said  to  him,  "  Blessed  art  thou,  Simon  Bar-jona,  for 
flesh  and  blood  hath  not  revealed  it  unto  thee,  but  my  Father 
which  is  in  heaven,"  (Matt.  xvi.  17.) 

We  must  not,  however,  misunderstand  the  extent  of  Peter's 
confession.  He  declared  his  faith  that  our  Lord  was  the  Anointed 
Messiah,  the  Son  of  the  living  God.  The  Messiahship  and 
divinity  of  Christ,  were  the  points  on  which  he  and  the  other 
apostles  laid  firm  hold.  But  the  sacrifice  and  death  of  Christ, 
and  His  substitution  for  us  on  the  cross,  were  not  things 
which  he  either  saw  or  understood  at  present.  (See  Matt.  xvi. 
22,  23.) 

(a.)  We  should  notice,  that  a  man's  heart  may  be  right  to- 
wards God,  while  he  remains  very  ignorant  of  some  great  doc- 


420  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

trines  of  tlie  Christian  faith.    It  certainly  was  so  with  Peter  and 
the  apostles,  at  this  time. 

(b.)  We  should  also  notice,  that  there  is  nothing  man  is  so 
backward  to  see,  as  the  sacrifice  of  the  death  of  Christ,  the  sub- 
stitution, and  the  atonement.  It  is  possible  to  be  right  about 
Christ's  divinity  and  Messiahship,  and  yet  be  in  the  dark  about 
His  death. 

(c.)  We  should  notice  how  ignorant  Christians  often  are  of 
the  state  of  others'  souls.  Peter  never  suspected  any  one  of  the 
twelve  to  be  a  false  apostle.  It  is  a  fearful  proof  that  Judas  must 
have  been,  in  all  outward  demeanour  and  profession,  just  hke  the 
rest  of  the  apostles. 

70. — [Have  not  I  chosen  you  twelve?]  I  do  not  think  that  the 
*'  choosing"  here  spoken  of,  means  anything  more  than  selec- 
tion for  office.  The  word  is  evidently  used  in  this  simple  sense, 
in  Luke  vi.  13, — "Of  them  he  chose  twelve,  whom  he  called 
apostles;"  Acts  vi.  5,  —  "They  chose  Stephen,  a  man  full  of 
faith ; "  Acts  xv.  22, — "  It  pleased  the  apostles, — to  send 
chosen  men  of  their  own  company  to  Antioch."  I  say  confi- 
dently, that  in  each  one  of  these  cases,  the  Greek  word  rendered 
"  chosen,"  the  very  same  word  that  is  used  here,  can  mean  no- 
thing more  than  "chosen  or  selected  for  an  office."  This  I 
believe,  with  Poole.  Henry,  and  Hutcheson,  is  the  meaning 
here. 

I  disagree  with  AHbrd's  remark,  that  "the  selection  of  the 
twelve,  was  the  consequence  of  the  giving  of  them  to  Him 
by  the  Father,"  and  that  Christ's  "  selecting,  and  the  Father's 
giving,  and  the  Father's  giving  and  drawing,  do  not  exclude 
final  falUng  away." — This  remark  is  built  on  the  gratuitous 
assumption,  that  Christ's  "  choosing "  here  spoken  of  is  the 
same  as  that  "  choosing  unto  salvation,"  which  is  the  special 
privilege  of  believers.  Of  that  "  choosing  unto  salvation," 
our  Lord  speaks  in  another  place,  where  He  carefully  draws 
the  distinction  between  the  true  disciples  and  the  false : — "  I 
speak  not  of  you  all :  I  know  whom  I  have  chosen."  (John 
xiii.  18.)  Of  that  choosing  unto  salvation,  Judas  was  not  a 
partaker.  Of  the  other  choosing  unto  office,  as  in  the  verse 
before  us,  undoubtedly  he  was  a  partaker. 

Burgon,  and  many  others,  agree  with  Alford,  and  dwell  on 
tlie  expression  before  us,  as  an  apparent  proof,  that  men 
"chosen  to  salvation"  may  fall  away.  But  "their  reasoning 
appears  to  me  inconclusive. 

Even  Quesnel,  the  Eomanist  commentator,  remarks,  "  The 
being  duly  called  to  the  ecclesiastical  office  is  not  sufficient,  if 
a  man  live  tot  suitably  to  that  holy  vocation."  Toletus,  the 
Spanish  Jesuit,  says  much  the  same. 


421 

[One  of  you  is  a  devil]  This  is  a  singularly  strong  expres- 
sion, and  gives  an  awfully  vivid  impression  of  the  wickedness 
of  Judas.  Of  course,  lie  was  not  literally  and  really  "  a  devil," 
but  a  man.  The  meaning  is,  "one  out  of  your  number  is  so 
completely  under  the  influence  of  the  devil,  such  a  servant  ol 
the  devil,  that  he  deserves  to  be  called  nothing  less  than  a 
devil."  Our  Lord,  in  another  place,  says  of  the  wicked  Jews, 
"  Ye  are  of  your  father,  the  devil."  (John  viii.  44.)  So  Si". 
Paul  says  to  Elymas,  "Thou  child  of  the  devil."  (Acts  xiii.  10.) 
When  we  read  at  a  later  period,  ''The  devH  having  now  put 
into  the  heart  of  Judas  Iscariot,  to  betray  him"  (John  xiii.  2), 
it  must  mean  the  final  working  out  of  a  wicked  purpose,  which, 
under  the  influence  of  the  devil^  Judas  had  long  had  in  his  heart. 

Let  us  note,  that  even  now,  Judas  is  called  "  a  devil,"  long 
before  our  Lord's  betrayal  and  crucifixion.  This  helps  to  show 
that  he  never  was  a  faithful  disciple,  even  from  the  first. 

Let  us  note,  that  the  only  other  expression  of  our  Lord's, 
which  at  all  approaches  the  one  before  us  in  strength  is  the  one 
which,  on  another  occasion,  our  Lord  applies  to  His  zealous 
apostle  Peter, — "  Get  thee  behind  me,  Satan."  (Matt.  xvi.  23.) 
While  we  condemn  the  wickedness  of  Judas,  let  us  not  fotget 
that  even  a  true-hearted  apostle  may  so  far  err  and  be  mistaken, 
that  he  needs  to  be  sharply  rebuked  and  called  "  Satan."  A  tho- 
roughly bad  man  is  "a  devil;"  but  even  a  good  man  may  need  to 
be  called  "Satan I" 

Rollock  observes,  that  Jesus  never  used  so  strong  an  expres- 
sion about  His  open  enemies  who  went  about  to  slay  Him.  It 
was  a  hypocrite  and  a  false  apostle,  whom  he  called  "  a  devil." 
Nothing  is  so  wicked  as  false  profession. 

7L — [Ue  spake  of  Judas  Iscariot  the  son  of  Simon.]  The  word 
"  Iscariot,"  according  to  some,  means  "  a  man  of  Kerioth."  Ke- 
rioth  was  a  town  of  Judah.  (Josh.  xv.  25.) — According  to  others, 
it  means  "a  man  oflssachar." — According  to  Lampe,  and  others, 
it  is  a  Syriac  word,  meaning  "the  bearer  of  the  purse." — We  are 
told  that  "He  had  the  bag."  (John  xiii.  29.) 

It  is  remarkable,  that  St.  John,  four  times  in  his  Gospel,  calls 
Judas  "  the  son  of  Simon."  We  do  not  exactly  know  why,  un- 
less it  is  that  Simon  was  a  person  well-known  by  name,  or  that 
St.  John  wished  to  make  it  quite  clear,  that  Judas  Iscariot  was 
not  St.  Jude,  the  faithful  apostle  and  cousin  of  Christ,  by  naming 
his  father.  There  is  no  proof  whatever,  that  Judas  was  the  son 
of  "  Simon  the  Ganaanite,"  the  apostle;  though  it  is  somewhat 
curious,  that  in  the  list  of  apostles  given  by  Matthew  and  Mark, 
Simon  and  Judas  Iscariot  are  named  in  close  juxta-position. 
(Matt.  X.  4;  Mark.  iii.  18.) 

[He  it  was  that  should  betray  him.]   This  would  be  more  lite- 


i22  EXPOSITORY  THOUGHTS. 

rally  rendered,  "  He  was  about  to  betray  Him."  The  expression 
seems  to  imply,  that  to  betray  such  a  master  as  Chris*,  Avas  so 
eminently  a  work  of  the  devil,  that  the  betrayer  ought  to  be 
spoken  of  as  "  a  devil." 

The  frequency  of  our  Lord's  warning=!  and  hints,  addressed  to 
Judas  Iscariot,  is  very  remarkable.  Rollock  observes,  what  an 
awful  proof  it  is  of  the  hardness  of  the  heart,  that  a  man  bo 
WfiFUed  should  not  be  conscience-stricken  and  repent. 


Date  Due 

MR  2 155 

I8» 

EBSSSS^ 

!'■ 

^ 

MAY  ♦  t  19? 

7 

mmmm^ 

# 

